
Class. 



•-■ •' - - e r >■ 



Bnnlf . ■ C 



HISTORY 



OF THE 



SEPAEATION 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS ; 

WHICH TOOK PLACE IN THE WINTER OP 1843 AND 1843, 

ON THE 

ANTI-SLAVEKY QUESTION; 

CONTAINING A 

BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE RISE, SPREAD, AND FINAL ADOPTION BY THE 

SOCIETY, OF ITS TESTIMONY AGAINST SLAVERY,- TOGETHER 

WITH A RECORD OF SOME OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTS AND 

CIRCUMSTANCES RELATING TO THAT SEPARATION; 

EMBRACING THE 

DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY BOTH PARTIES RELATIVE THERETO; 



3ome Account of the Action of other Yearly Meetings of Friend*, 
touching the Controversy, especially that of London, etc 



By WALTER EDGERTON, 



CINCINNATI: 
ACHILLES PUGH, PRINTER 

120 MAIN STREET. 

18 5 6, 



^> 



l^uP 






K 



Is- 



k 



PREFACE 



It is now (the summer of 1855) between twelve and thirteen 
years since the Separation took place in Indiana Yearly Meet- 
ing of Friends, on the Anti-Slavery question. Owing to the 
peculiar position which Friends, especially in the United States, 
occupied at and near the time of the difficulty, the true state 
of the case was very little known among them, nor could it be 
brought before the mass of the members of Society as then 
controlled. I trust that the feeling is now somewhat different 
among them ; that prejudice has so far given way, that a larger 
number, at least, will be willing to hear. Such need to see 
the documents, and to look into the matter for themselves. 

Added to this, those who were children then, even in our 
midst, but who had no hand in the proceedings, have now 
attained to maturity ; they see the parties, but know nothing 
in a manner as to the real cause of the division. Many of 
them have no means of knowing what caused the Separation, 
nor where the blame should rightfully attach. And such as 
may possess some means of knowledge in this respect, have 
only detached portions of the controversy, and, therefore, are 
very inadequately furnished. To supply this defect, by placing 
the means of a correct understanding of the case within the 
reach of all, as well as to serve the cause of Truth, in preserv- 
ing a faithful record of the transactions alluded to, for the in- 
formation of posterity, has been my object in the compilation 
of the following history. 

The plan of the work is to give both sides of the question — 
to present what each party said for itself — leaving the reader, 
in most instances, to decide for himself, and draw his own con- 
clusions. It is true, I have in the Introduction exhibited the 
conduct and practices of our early Friends on the Anti-Slavery 
question, and, to some extent, contrasted them with the pro- 



IV PREFACE. 

ceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, as connected with the 
history of the Separation; but my object has been in this, to 
fix the attention of the reader on the points at issue between 
the parties, more than anything else. 

I have omitted no document issued by either of the Yearly 
Meetings, or their representatives, bearing upon the controversy, 
that I could reasonably obtain ; indeed, none of any particular 
importance. 

In perusing the work, the reader may discover what may 
seem to him as tautology, but he should bear in mind, that in 
following out the plan which I have adopted (which, I think, 
must meet the approbation of the impartial reader), of giving 
what each party said in the controversy, it could not be other- 
wise, so far as a repetition of the same thing occurs in the 
documents inserted. 

It may be objected by some, that the publication of such a 
work will be likely to harrow up those unpleasant feelings 
which attended the parties at the time of the controversy ; but 
I feel confident that none will be hurt by it, who sincerely de- 
sire that a knowledge of the truth should prevail. No good 
can result to any Church by covering up its wrongs, or by suf- 
fering the impression to remain, that those who were really in 
the right were the transgressors, when a plain, unvarnished 
exhibition of historical facts can remove it, even if such exhi- 
bition should unfold grievous errors in the Church. Indeed, 
we cannot believe that the All-powerful One, He who is holi- 
ness, mercy and truth, and who is no respecter of persons, will 
always suffer his cause and truth to remain prostrate. 

u Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again — 
The eternal years of God are hers ; 
But error, wounded, writhes in pain, 
And dies amid her worshipers." 

The work was commenced several years back, but various 
circumstances conspired to prevent its completion till the pre- 
sent season. I trust, however, it will be none the less interest- 
ing on account of the delay. 

WALTER EDGERTON. 



CONTENTS. 



Introduction 9 

CHAPTER I. 
The origin of the scheme of Immediate and Unconditional Emanci- 
pation, and the Anti-Slavery movement based thereon — The appro- 
val of that movement and its advocates by the Yearly Meeting — 
Its change and opposition to that cause, etc - 33 

CHAPTER II. 
'Report of a Sub-Committee of New Garden branch of the Commit- 
tee, on the Concerns of the People of Color 44 

CHAPTER III. 
Free Labor Convention at Spiceland — Proceedings of the Yearly 
Meeting against the Abolitionists 47 

CHAPTER IV. 
Address of Joseph Sturge to Friends in the United States 50 

CHAPTER V. 
Completion of the measures by the Yearly Meeting in 1842, which 
produced the Separation 57 

CHAPTER VI. 
First move of the Anti-Slavery party looking toward the Re-Organiza- 
tion of the Society 60 

CHAPTER VII. 
"Address of a Conference of Friends, held at Newport, Wayne 
County, Indiana, First month 4th, 1843; to the Members of Indiana 
Yearly Meeting." 63 



Tl CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

Remarks on the subject of the Call by the Editor of the Free-Labor 
Advocate — Letter and declaration of Charles Osborne. . 66 

CHAPTER IX. 

Proceedings of the Convention to consider the subject of Re-Organiz- 
ing the Society— Its Declaration 73 

CHAPTER X. 
An Epistle to London — One to Anti-Slavery Friends 92 

CHAPTER XI. 

The Policy of the Leaders in the Opposition to A. S. F. changed — 
Address of their Meetings for Sufferings, touching the Separation. 100 

CHAPTER XII. 

Reply to the Address of the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting 107 

CHAPTER XIII. 

Some corroborative Remarks — Origin of the Use of the Term "Body" 
—Anonymous Review of the Declaration of A. S. Friends 128 

CHAPTER XIV. 
Defense against the Attacks of an Anonymous Reviewer. 149 

CHAPTER XV. 
Declaration of Sentiment of A. S. Friends < 186 

CHAPTER XVI. 

Address of the Indiana Yearly Meeting to the Christian Profes- 
sors, etc 192 

CHAPTER XVII. 

"Review of an 'Address of the Society of Friends of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting to the Christian Professors in the United States, and to the 
Citizens generally, on the subject of Slavery.' " 199 



CONTENTS. Vll 

CHAPTER XVIII. 
The Epistles issued by the Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, unno- 
ticed by other Yearly Meetings, except London — Letter to the Edi- 
tors of the "British Friend," by Elijah Coffin and others of 
Richmond 208 

CHAPTER XIX. 

Reply to Elijah Coffin and others by the Editors of the " British 
Friend." 217 

CHAPTER XX. 

Remarks by the Editor of the Free-Labor Advocate on the Corres- 
pondence between E. Coffin and others and the Editors of the 
British Friend — A Review by Daniel Puckett and others of certain 
Positions and Proceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, etc. 227 

CHAPTER XXI. 

Exposition of the Sentiments and Principles of leading Members of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting relative to Slavery 239 

CHAPTER XXII. 

"An Expostulation to those who have lately seceded from the Society 
of Friends." 242 

CHAPTER XXIII. 

"A Reply to a Document entitled, 'An Expostulation to those who 
have lately seceded from the Society of Friends/ 257 

CHAPTER XXIV. 
Address to the Meeting for Sufferings of London 304 

CHAPTER XXV. 

Address to the Members of the Society of Friends individually con- 
stituting London Yearly Meeting— Postscript touching the treat- 
ment of Dublin Yearly Meeting 311 



Vlll CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER XXVI. 

Committee appointed by London Yearly Meeting to endeavor to heal 
the Breach — The Address of that Meeting to those who had left 
Indiana Yearly Meeting 324 

CHAPTER XXVII. 
Epistle of Advice and Statement of Facts, etc 327 

CHAPTER XXVIII. 
Account of the Proceedings of the English Committee in Iowa. , . . .337 

CHAPTER XXIX. 
Proceedings of the English Committee at Nettle Creek .343 

CHAPTER XXX. 

English Committee at Newport — A Response to the Address carried 
round by that Committee 347 



INTRODUCTION. 



In order that the reader may more fully comprehend the 
brief history here presented, I deem it important to spread 
before his view, a concise account of the origin of the testi- 
mony of the Society of Friends against Slavery ; its progress 
toward that of perfection ; the part which the Society, as a 
body, took, at an early stage in its history, against that 
system ; and also, of the action of individual members, in be- 
half of the oppressed African, at the same and subsequent 
periods. 

None, I apprehend, who are acquainted with the leading 
principles of the Society, can fail to see that they are neces- 
sarily and pre-eminently Anti-Slavery in their tendency, hence, 
to understand them thoroughly, and be governed by them 
completely, is to be an Abolitionist. 

George Fox, as early as the year 1671, while on the island 
of Barbadoes, bore his testimony against the sin of Slavery in 
the following language : 

" Consider with yourselves, if you were in the same condi- 
tion as the poor Africans, who came strangers to you, and 
were sold to you as slaves ; I say, if this should be the con- 
dition of you or yours, you would think it a hard measure, 
yea, and very great bondage and cruelty. And therefore, 
consider seriously of this, and do you for them and to them, 
as you would willingly have them or any others do unto you, 
were you in like slavish condition, and bring them to know the 
Lord Christ." 

Again, speaking of the advice he had given to Friends of 
that island, he says : " I desired also, that they would cause 
their overseers to deal mildly and gently with their negroes, 
and not to use cruelty towards them, as the manner of some 
had been, and after certain years of servitude, they should 
make them free." 

Notwithstanding, the sinfulness and cruelty of Slavery are 
here recognized, yet there is an evident lack of that fullness 



10 INTRODUCTION. 

and thoroughness in his testimony which the principles of the 
Society necessarily embrace, when fully comprehended, and for 
which, considering his character for clearness of perception, 
we should naturally have looked. But we have reason to 
believe, that he, as well as other Friends of that day, were 
under an erroneous impression, in regard to the manner in 
which the Africans were obtained from their native land. Let 
us imagine for a moment, that Friends had been induced to 
believe, through the representations of artful and covetous 
men, that the negroes brought from Africa were such as had 
been rescued from death — prisoners of war, who would other- 
wise have been destroyed, and their actions in purchasing 
such assume the character of benevolence, especially should 
they act in accordance with the advice of George Fox, above 
quoted, to " deal gently and mildly with them," " bring them 
to know the Lord Christ/ 9 and after certain years, to make 
them free. Clarkson, in his history of the abolition of the 
Slave Trade, in allusion to the early settlement of America by 
Friends, and their action in regard to the matter before us, 
remarks : "In these days, indeed, the purchase of them 
(negroes) was deemed favorable to both parties, for there 
was little or no knowledge of the manner in which they had 
been procured as slaves. There was no charge of inconsist- 
ency on this account, as in later times.' ' 

This circumstance, in connection with the fact, that the 
principal mission of our early Friends, was to correct the 
errors and abuses which had crept into the Christian Church 
in regard to doctrine, discipline and religious performances, 
closely occupying their time and attention, may readily account 
for so little being found on record relating to the subject of 
Slavery, and especially so, when we reflect that they, our first 
Friends, lived in a land far removed from the scenes of op- 
pression connected with the system. 

As regards Friends beyond the Atlantic, I find but one 
other beside George Fox, who expressed a sentiment touching 
the matter for many years, and that was William Edmundson, 
a minister and resident of Ireland, who, coming to the same 
island of Barbadoes, and where he had an opportunity of wit- 
nessing the evils of Slavery, interested himself in behalf of 
the sufferers. This seemed to irritate the governor of the 
island, who appeared to think, that to make the negroes 
Christians, " would make them rebel and cut their (masters') 



INTRODUCTION. 11 

throats." W. E. says : " I told him it was a good work, to 
bring them to the knowledge of God and Christ Jesus, and to 
believe in him who died for them, and for all men, and that 
that would keep them from rebelling or cutting any man's 
throat. But if they did rebel, and cut their throats, as he 
said, it would be through their own doings, in keeping them in 
ignorance and under oppression, giving them liberty to be 
wicked ; and on the other hand, starving them for want of 
meat and clothes convenient, so giving them liberty in that 
which God restrained, and restraining them in that which 
God allowed and afforded to all men, which was meat and 
clothes." 

Although there was doubtless some progress in the right 
direction experienced by individual members, in regard to this 
subject, yet the first testimony of the Society in Great Britain, 
which I find recorded, is embraced in a Minute of the Yearly 
Meeting, held in London, in 1727, in which they say, " it is 
the sense of this meeting, that the importing of negroes from 
their native country and relations, by Friends, is not a com- 
mendable nor allowed practice, and is, therefore, censured by 
this meeting/ ' 

To those who have from infancy been accustomed to hear- 
ing " the importing of negroes from their native country," to 
be bartered like cattle in the market, denounced as piracy — 
as a crime demanding the utmost rigor of law for its punish- 
ment and suppression, the language here used by a Yearly 
Meeting of Friends, is somewhat astonishing ; but we should 
bear in mind, that education and the customary routine of ac- 
tion in the surrounding country, have a powerful tendency 
with the most of men, to bar reflection and critical investiga- 
tion. 

Although the principles of the Society embrace a full, com- 
plete and energetic testimony, not merely against the Slave 
Trade, but Slavery itself; yet, the want of ardor and percep- 
tion manifested in this instance, is not more strange than that 
the apostle Peter, after • hearing the command of the Lord 
Jesus to him and the rest of the disciples, to "go teach all 
nations," should still act upon the principle, that none should 
be taught but the Jews, the people of his own nation. 

With regard to Friends in America, it appears that some 
were uneasy with the practice of trading in their fellow-men, 
frcm its first introduction amongst them, and bore their 



12 INTRODUCTION. 

testimony against it ; but for a time it was done in a private 
manner, yet, eventually, the subject was by this class, intro- 
duced to the notice of Friends as a body. And it should ever 
be borne in mind, as a useful and profitable reflection, that 
individual action must necessarily precede that of a general, 
united, or congressional character. 

If we turn our attention to the manner in which the Society 
of Friends became so entangled with Slavery, we shall find it 
was through unobstructed individual agency, and that through 
this medium alone, the Society in America gradually became 
so completely and lamentably involved. So, also, it was 
through individual zeal and effort, that the different Yearly 
Meetings, in process of time, were brought to see the sinfulness 
of the practice, and to prohibit it among their members. 

Notwithstanding the truth of these remarks appears to be 
almost self-evident, yet its rejection is a matter intimately con- 
nected with the history of the Separation, and will be pre- 
sented in its proper place, and I would press it upon the 
reader, to keep this fact in view. 

It appears that the Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania, thirty- 
one years previous to the date of the Minute of London 
Yearly Meeting, above quoted, or in 1696, advised its members 
to " guard against future importations of African Slaves, and to 
be particularly attentive to the treatment of those who were 
then in their possession. 

Fifteen years after this date, or in 1711, we find it but little, 
if any, improved on the subject; it then renewed the same ad- 
vice as given before ; but an Epistle issued by the same meet- 
ing in 1754, exhibits a marked change of feeling and senti- 
ment. Let an extract or two suffice to show this, 

" It hath frequently been the concern of our Yearly Meet^ 
ing to testify their uneasiness and disunity with the importa- 
tion and purchasing of Negroes and other Slaves, and to direct 
the overseers of the several meetings, to advise and deal with 
such as engage therein. * * * * * 

" Now, dear Friends, if we continually bear in mind the 
royal law, of doing to others as we would be done by, we 
should never think of bereaving our fellow-creatures of that 
valuable blessing, liberty, nor endure to grow rich by their 
bondage." * * * * * * * 

Between the two dates last mentioned, flourished a number 
of Friends in this Yearly Meeting, who labored zealously and 



INTRODUCTION. 13 

faithfully for the removal of the evil referred to from Society, 
which accounts for the happy change of feeling we have no- 
ticed. Among these were William Burling, Ralph Sandiford, 
John Woodman, and Anthony Benezet. 

The first of these took the opportunity to bear his testimony, 
not merely against the Slave-trade, but against the system of 
Slavery itself, in their annual meeting ; and continued the 
practice, at each similar recurrence, for years. 

Ralph Sandiford published a work in 1729, entitled, " The 
Mystery of Iniquity in a brief Examination of the Practice of 
the Times. " This he circulated gratuitously wherever he 
thought it might be of use, it being "a valuable appeal in 
behalf of the African cause.' ' " He was very earnest," it is 
remarked, " in endeavoring to prevail upon his friends, both 
in and out of the Society, to liberate those whom they held in 
bondage. " 

The labors of John Woolman, in this cause, would require a 
volume fully to rehearse. He was probably the first Friend 
who bore a complete and consistent testimony against the sin 
of slave-holding, by endeavoring to avoid a participation in 
the gain of oppression ; or in other words, by abstaining from 
the use of the produce of the slave's toil. A few extracts 
from his Journal may serve to show a little of the character of 
his labors. 

In attending the Yearly Meeting in 1758, he remarks, " The 
case of slave keeping lay heavy upon me ; nor did I find any 
engagement to speak directly to any other matter before the 
meeting. When this case was opened, several faithful Friends 
spoke weightily thereto, with which I was comforted ; and feel- 
ing a concern to cast in my mite, I said in substance, as fol- 
lows : In the difficulties attending us in this life, nothing is 
more precious than the mind of Truth inwardly manifested ; 
and it is my earnest desire that in this weighty matter we may 
be so truly humbled as to be favored with a clear understand- 
ing of the mind of Truth, and follow it ; this would be of 
more advantage to the Society than any medium not in the 
clearness of Divine wisdom. The case is difficult to some who 
have slaves ; but if such set aside all self-interest, and come 
to be weaned from the desire of getting estates, or even hold- 
ing them together, when Truth requires the contrary, I believe 
way will open that they will know how to steer through those 
difficulties." 
2 



14 INTRODUCTION. 

" Many Friends/' he continues, "appeared to be deeply 
bowed under the weight of the work, and manifested much 
firmness in their ] e + o the cause of Truth and universal 
righteousness on the earth. Though none openly justified the 
practice of slave keeping in general, yet some appeared con- 
cerned, lest the meeting should go into such measures as 
might give uneasiness to many brethren ; alleging that if 
Friends patiently continued under the exercise, the Lord, in 
time to come, might open a way for the deliverance of these 
people. " 

The striking similarity of these remarks, with those used hy 
leading members of Indiana Yearly Meeting during the course 
of the events, which it is my present purpose to record, the 
observing reader cannot fail to discover. "If Friends," it 
was frequently observed, " will keep in the patience and in 
the quiet, the Lord will, in his own good time, set the slaves 
at liberty." But let us hear John Woolman's reply to this 
class : 

" My mind is often led to consider the purity of the divine 
Being, and the justice of his judgments ; and herein my soul 
is covered with awfulness. I cannot omit to hint of some 
cases, where people have not been treated with the purity of 
justice, and the event hath been lamentable. Many slaves on 
this continent are oppressed, and their cries have reached the 
ears of the Most High. Such are the purity and certainty of 
his judgments, that he cannot be partial in our favor. In in- 
finite love and goodness, he hath opened our understandings 
from one time to another, concerning our duty toward this peo- 
ple ; and it is not a time for delay. Should we now be sensi- 
ble of what he requires of us, and through respect to the pri- 
vate interest of some persons, or through a regard to some 
friendships which do not stand on an immutable foundation, 
neglect to do our duty in firmness and constancy, still waiting 
for some extraordinary means to bring about their deliverance, 
it may be that God may answer us in this matter by terrible 
things in righteousness." 

As we have already seen, many Friends at this time kept 
slaves, especially in the then Southern Provinces, where he 
sometimes traveled. When among them he was careful to 
endeavor to keep clear of the gain of oppression, even in the 
hospitalities received at their hands. In regard to this subject 
he remarks: "When I expected soon to leave a Friend's 



INTRODUCTION. 15 

house where I had had entertainment, if I believed that I 
should not keep clear from the gain of oppression without 
leaving'money, I spoke to one of the heads of the family pri- 
vately, and desired him to accept of some pieces of silver, and 
give them to such of the negroes as he believed would make 
the best use of them ; and at other times I gave them to the 
negroes myself, as the way looked clearest to me." 

He published two articles or treatises, entitled, " Considera- 
tions on the keeping of Negroes ;" the first in 1754, and the 
second in 1762 ; both excellent documents, and well calculated 
to arouse the dormant sensibilities of the human mind to a 
sense of the great injustice and cruelty of the practice. 

Clarkson, in his history already referred to, remarks "that 
Anthony Benezet (the last-named Friend, and prominent la- 
borer in the Yearly Meeting at the time to which I have called 
attention,) may be considered as one of the most zealous, vigi- 
lant, and active advocates, which the cause of the oppressed 
Africans ever had. He seemed to have been born, and to 
have lived for the promotion of it, and, therefore, he never 
omited any, the least opportunity of serving it." 

It appears that he voluntarily chose the humble situation of 
a schoolmaster, in preference to the flattering prospect of 
wealth by entering into mercantile operations, for which he 
had already been prepared by an apprenticeship ; deeming 
"wealth of no importance when compared with the enjoyment 
of doing good." 

As a means of promoting the cause of the slave, he en- 
deavored to give his scholars a correct knowledge, and just 
impressions concerning it ; thus instilling into their susceptible 
minds his own benevolent principles, and eventually bringing 
forth many advocates into the field. 

Had his bright example been generally followed by teachers, 
and those having the care of the youth, what a world of suf- 
fering, sorrow, and crime would have been prevented ! It is 
evident a very important change in public sentiment and feel- 
ing is absolutely necessary to secure the triumph of the Anti- 
slavery cause. Many of those advanced in years are entirely 
hopeless : it is to the youth, therefore, mainly that we must 
look for recruits to freedom's hosts ; and hence it is of the 
first importance to diffuse a thorough Anti-slavery literature 
throughout the country, and, by imitating the example of our 
friend, impart that kind of instruction to the youth, which 



16 INTRODUCTION. 

will, under the blessing of Providence, make them Aboli- 
tionists. 

But to return from this digression ; I will observe that he 
also wrote various articles on the subject of Slavery, and pro- 
cured their insertion in almanacs and public newspapers. 
. In 1762, he published a work entitled, "A short Account of 
that part of Africa inhabited by the Negroes," 

About five years after this, he published another work, en- 
titled, " An Historical Account of Guinea, its Situation, Pro- 
duce, and the General Disposition of its Inhabitants, with an 
Inquiry into the Rise and Progress of the Slave-trade, its Na- 
ture and Calamitous Effects." 

The last-named work seems to have been eminently useful, 
exceeding anything previously published on the subject, in 
spreading a correct knowledge, and in exciting a just abhor- 
rence of the Slave-trade. 

We have here presented a historical outline of individual 
action in the Anti-slavery cause, of an important character. 
It was individual zeal and effort, under the blessing of the 
Head of the Church, which eventually purged the Society 
from slave- holding. Individual members moved in advance of 
the body, or there could have been no progress or improve- 
ment. 

Let us now again glance at the progress of London Yearly 
Meeting on the subject. We have seen what it was up to the 
year 1727. Thirty-one years after this date — that is to say, in 
1758 — we find them using very different language. They 
say, u We fervently warn all in profession with us, that they 
carefully avoid being any way concerned in reaping the un- 
righteous profits arising from the iniquitous practice of dealing 
in negro, or other slaves ; whereby, in the original purchase, 
one man selleth another, as he doth the beasts that perish, 
without any better pretensions to a property in him than that 
of superior force ; in direct violation of the Gospel rule, which 
teacheth all to do as they would be done by, and to do good 
to all. We, therefore, can do no less than, with the greatest 
earnestness, impress it upon Friends everywhere, that they 
endeavor to keep their hands clear of this unrighteous gain of 
oppression." 

Notwithstanding the above contains warm and energetic 
counsel and caution, yet it is still not positively prohibitory, 
or, in other words, it does not make such " dealing" a dis- 



INTRODUCTION. 17 

ownable offense. But three years afterward, in 1761, this 
was efftcted, as will be seen by the subjoined Minute of that 
year. 

" This meeting having reason to apprehend that divers 
under our name, are concerned in the unchristian traffic in 
negroes, doth recommend it earnestly to the care of Friends 
everywhere to discourage as much as in them lies, a practice 
so repugnant to our Christian profession, and to deal with all 
such as shall persevere in a conduct so reproachful to Christ- 
ianity ; and to disown them if they desist not therefrom.'' 

In 1763, the line appears to have been drawn a lit'le closer. 
They say: " We renew our exhortation, that Friends every- 
where, be especially careful to keep their hands clear of giving 
any encouragement in any shape, to the slave-trade, etc., etc. 

Had this advice been strictly obeyed, it would have pre- 
vented, not merely the furnishing of materials for the construc- 
tion of ships, and the accommodation of their crews, for such 
voyages, by Friends, which probably was the matter here 
alluded to, but also the holding of Slaves (which many of them 
were then in the practice of,) as well as prevented the use of 
the produce of the bondman's unrequited toil ; for to many of 
us it is now as clear as noon-day, that the use of such produce 
is not simply an " encouragement," but the very spring of 
life to Slavery ', and the trade in the bodies and souls of men, 
with all their concomitant horrors. But the Yearly Meeting 
probably never thought of the essential and necessary depend- 
ence of this unchristian traffic " upon the holding of slaves, 
and the use of products of the labor of men and women 
" bought and sold ;" for, up to this date, its advices on the 
subject, appear to Ime been confined to the traffic, without re- 
ferring to the moving causes. But in the course of tLe next 
nine years, some progress seems to have been made, as will 
appear by the following Minute of. the meeting of 1772 : 

" It appears that the practice of holding negroes in oppres- 
sive and unnatural bondage, hath been so successfully dis- 
couraged by Friends in some of the colonies, as to be consider- 
ably lessened. We cannot but approve of these salutary 
endeavors, and earnestly entreat they may be continued, that 
through the favor of Divine Providence, a traffic so unmerci- 
ful and unjust in its nature, to a part of our own species, 
made, equally with ourselves for immortality, may come to be 



18 INTRODUCTION. 

considered by all in its proper light, and be utterly abolished 
as a reproach to the Christian name." 

Notwithstanding all that is said in the above is strictly true, 
yet it is evident, that they were under the same erroneous im- 
pression which has ever since prevailed, till within a few years, 
both in England and America, viz : that the foreign slave- 
trade, rather than Slavery itself, is the great evil, and the first 
object for the attack of philanthropists. It was an error of 
judgment in this respect, that led the British abolitionists, with 
the renowned Granville Sharp and Thomas Clarkson at their 
head, to abandon the only true and consistent position ; that is, 
of opposition to Slavery and the slave-trade, and to attack 
the latter only. 

It is now generally admitted by those best acquainted with 
the subject, that there is no hope of doing away the African 
slave-trade, while Slavery itself is allowed to exist ; and that 
human suffering is rather increased than diminished by the 
enactments against it. Such is the influence of gold upon the 
cupidity of man, that as long as slaves can be sold, especially 
under the sanction of law, men will be found, who will supply 
the market at any hazard ; no law that can be enacted, will 
prevent. 

But to return : hitherto the Yearly Meeting appears to have 
directed its labors on the subject exclusively to its own mem- 
bers, but this was a field too circumscribed for the benevolent 
principles of genuine Quakerism, or Christianity. The evil 
was rife around them ; their country was involved in it, and 
their fellow-men suffering its unspeakable cruelties ; a more 
public testimony must be borne. Accordingly, that meeting 
in 1783, caused a petition to be drawn up and presented to 
the House of Commons, in which they represent the suffering 
situation of the enslaved, as a subject " loudly calling for the 
humane interposition of the Legislature," and requested an 
embargo placed upon the traffic in human beings. 

This appears to be the first act of the Meeting having a 
general bearing on the subject, and indeed, the first petition 
ever presented to Parliament against the slave-trade. 

The same meeting recommended the subject to its standing 
committee, the Meeting for Sufferings, which, before the close 
of the year, issued an address to the public, in which they en- 
deavored to enlighten the minds of their readers in regard to 



INTRODUCTION. 19 

the cruel nature of the traffic, and ordered two thousand copies 
printed for distribution. 

An example is here presented worthy of imitation. Here 
we see a Meeting for Sufferings performing the labor, and at- 
tending to the duties of an " Abolition Meeting," in the strict- 
est sense of the terms : that is, endeavoring to enlighten the 
public mind in regard to the evils of Slavery. 

This zealous and hearty action of the Society, as a body, 
which it was now prepared to take, no doubt made way for, 
and gave encouragement to, another very important move- 
ment. 

This was the formation of an association, called the " Quaker 
Committee." The first meeting of this noble little band was 
held on 7th of Seventh month, of the same year, 1783. 

" They assembled to -consider what steps they should take 
for the relief and liberation of the negro slaves in the West 
Indies, and for the discouragement of the slave-trade on the 
eoast of Africa." 

Their names were: "William Dillwyn, George Harrison, 
Samuel Hoare, Thomas Knowles, M. D., John Lloyd, and 
Joseph Woods. These, it should be remembered, were all 
Friends. There was no jealousy entertained by the Yearly 
Meeting, or the body of Society, that some Friends entering 
into an association for the abolition of " Slavery, would 
imply that the rest were not Abolitionists, that the body 
was defective in principle, in regard to the matter—" far from 
it. The exhibition of this kind of feeling was left for after 
ages, which will perhaps be better understood in the sequel. 

The result of their first consultation, was a conviction of 
the necessity of adopiing some measures for enlightening the 
minds of the people respecting those evils. As the most feas- 
ible, they agreed to make use of the public papers, appointing 
first one, and then another of their members to write articles, 
and have them inserted therein. 

They kept regular minutes of their proceedings, and in the 
course of the same year in which they organized, held several 
meetings, and secured a place in no less than nine periodicals, 
for the insertion of such matter as they deemed suitable to the 
purpose. 

In 1784, they followed the same plan, except that in addi- 
tion, they began to print books on the subject ; and in the year 
following, continued their labor as before. 



20 INTRODUCTION. 

While these events were transpiring, the Society itself, was 
actively engaged in the same work ; for the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings in 1785, recommended Quarterly Meetings, to distri- 
bute a work entitled " A Caution to Great Britain and her 
Colonies, in a short Eepresentation of the calamitous state of 
the enslaved Negroes in the British Dominions/ ' and which 
was written by Anthony Benezet, in America. 

This book was accordingly distributed, and was sent to 
many persons of note throughout the kingdom. 

It is true, the work was written and published by a Friend, 
but there was not only no objection in those days of candor 
and simplicity in the Society, to an individual publishing 
an article, advocating "one of our important testimonies," 
without first submitting it to the examination of a Meeting 
for Sufferings, but, as we have seen, the strongest kind of 
encouragement was given to it — to this " activity" and zeal 
in the advocacy of their principles. It is clear that it was 
to them a source of great pleasure, to see such lively 
interest manifested by a brother, in so good a cause, in- 
stead of chagrin, as similar efforts of later time seem to 
have been, to some, connected with the history of the events 
hereafter to be presented. 

On the 22d of Fifth month, 1787, those Friends consti- 
tuting the committee referred to, who associated together 
to promote the liberation of the negroes in the West Indies, 
except Thomas Knowles, who was then on his death-bed, 
met together, and they, with other Friends, united with 
Granville Sharp, Thomas Clarkson, and Philip Sansom, in an 
organization for the promotion of the cause of the oppressed 
Africans. In the Sixth month following, they came to the 
conclusion, to confine their opposition to the slave-trade alone, 
and to adopt this title : " The Committee instituted for effecting 
the Abolition of the Slave-trade." 

Thus, an association was formed, composed of Friends and 
ethers, which continued its labors, truly arduous, for the space 
of twenty years, and until it effected its object, the abolition 
of the legalized traffic in human beings in Great Britain. 
Friends, at the time of which we are speaking, appeared to 
entertain no fears of lowering their testimonies and the stand- 
ard of Truth, by uniting with those who were not members, in 
pleading the cause of humanity. And it is a fact worthy of 
notice, that this very circumstance gave the Society one of its 



INTRODUCTION. 21 

most able advocates, and one whose works have scarcely been 
of less importance to the Society, than those of its most gifted 
members. This is familiar to all who are acquainted with 
H Clarkson's Portraiture of Quakerism," a work which the 
venerable author was induced to prepare in consequence of his 
becoming so intimately acquainted with Friends through the 
medium above referred to. (See his introduction to the work.) 

The above remarks, and their application, will be better un- 
derstood in the sequel, as the events to which they refer are 
unfolded ; I must, therefore, beg the reader to bear them in 
mind. 

We will now return to Friends in America. 

I have already given a sketch of the proceedings of the 
Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania, on the Anti-slavery ques- 
tion, up to the year 1764. I do not find a record of any ad- 
vanced step taken by that meeting for twenty years, or till in 
1774. By a Minute of that year, all members concerned in 
importing, selling, purchasing, giving or transferring negro or 
other slaves, or otherwise acting in such manner as to continue 
them in slavery beyond the term limited by law or custom, 
were directed to be disowned. 

In the year 1776, the Yearly Meeting adopted the rule that 
those who owned slaves, and who refused to execute suitable 
instruments for their liberation, should be disowned from the 
Society. 

Much less appears on record concerning the labors and exer- 
cises of other Yearly Meetings in America, in regard to the 
subject. In respect to them, Clarkson observes : "And as the 
Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania and the Jerseys set this 
bright example, (tLat is, to allow no member to hold slaves,) 
so those of New England, New York, Maryland, Virginia, and 
of the Carolinas and Georgia, in process of time, followed it." 
Other accounts, however, state the matter a little different ; 
that those of New England and New York, at least, did not 
follow ; that New England adopted the rule some five or six 
years previous — that is, in 1770, or 1771 — and that New York 
Yearly Meeting adopted it in 1774. The Anti-slavery refor- 
mation was, however, pretty much simultaneous throughout 
the Society. Active, zealous, and faithful Friends were found 
in all the Yearly Meetings: and although these met with much 
opposition from individuals, yet I apprehend but few meetings 
interposed a barrier to their labors ; an instance or two, how- 



22 INTRODUCTION, 

ever, of this kind, I will introduce as bearing some, though a 
slight resemblance to that which produced the Secession, the 
circumstances of which it is my purpose to record. 

It appears certain faithful Friends of Chester Monthly 
Meeting, within the limits of the Yearly Meeting for Pennsyl- 
vania, had, for some time, been laboring to convince their 
friends that their conduct, in regard to Slavery, was wrong, 
and the subject was introduced by Minute from that Monthly 
Meeting to Chester Quarterly Meeting, and thence forwarded 
to the Yearly Meeting, in 1775 ; upon the presentation of 
which, the following Minute was adopted : 

"If any Friends are concerned in the importation of negroes, 
let them be dealt with and advised to avoid that practice, ac- 
cording to the sense of former meetings in that behalf; and 
that all do forbear judging or reflecting on one another, either 
in public or private, concerning the detaining or keeping them 
servants." 

This, it seems, was all the meeting could do at that time, 
because the controlling influences were in the practice of slave- 
holding themselves, or indifferent as to its existence. 

How true it is, that those who are in the practice of a wrong, 
and in measure sensible of it, yet having not the moral courage 
to live in unison with the secret intimations of Divine Truth, are 
ever ready to invoke the spirit of forbearance and charity in 
that matter. Even as a Yearly Meeting they can exhort " to 
forbear judging or reflecting on one another, either in public 
or private " for holding slaves ; and simply because they do 
not wish to be censured for it themselves. 

As soon as Friends of this Yearly Meeting, or its controlling 
members, became in earnest to put away the evil of their own 
doings, they could then, not only censure for the practice, but 
finally disow T n such as would not desist ; and be sensible, too, 
that they could do it without any breach of charity, or want 
of " forbearance." 

The opposition to the reformation and its advocates, was not, 
in every case, as mild even as the one referred to above. 

"Among the first of those who opposed the practice of slave- 
holding was a female Friend, residing in Virginia, and for this 
opposition she was disowned from her religious society. When 
on her death-bed she sent for the committee who had treated 
with her, told them that the near approach of death had not 
altered her mind on the subject of Slavery ; and then gently 



INTRODUCTION, 23 

waving her hand toward a very fertile and beautiful tract of 
country that lay before her window, she said, with great so- 
lemnity, ' Friends, the time will come when there will not be 
Friends enough in this district to hold one meeting for worship, 
and this garden will be turned into a wilderness.' There were, 
at the time, seven meetings of Friends in that part of Virginia, 
but they have all long since been deserted, and the country 
literally desolated. " 

The above narrative is taken from the British Friend, of 
12th mo., 1854. 

The whole circumstance is calculated to impress a lesson of 
deep instruction, and to fix upon the mind the necessity of 
individual faithfulness, even if it be at an expense of union 
with the body, and to show clearly that meetings have greatly 
erred ; and hence that implicit confidence in their decisions is a 
dangerous position to occupy. 

In the year 1774, the formation of an association took place 
in Pennsylvania, " for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, and 
the relief of free Negroes, unlawfully held in bondage." 

This society was composed of Friends and others indiscrimin- 
ately. James Pemberton, one of the most conspicuous Friends 
in the Yearly Meeting, and Dr. Rush, a man of eminence, 
belonging to a different denomination, were the principal agents 
in effecting this organization. 

In 1787, the association had Dr. Franklin for its president; 
James Pemberton and Jonathan Penrose for vice-presidents ; 
and Dr. Benjamin Rush and Tench Cox for secretaries. 

Societies similar to that of Pennsylvania, were established 
in New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, 
and other States ; in each of which, Friends and others were 
similarly united in promoting the great and excellent work. 

We have now taken a concise view of the Rise and Progress 
of the testimony of our Society against the Slave-trade and 
Slavery, up to the time when its members were prohibited 
from taking any part in the trade, or holding their fellow-men 
in bondage ; and have seen Friends, both in England and 
America, uniting with those not of the Society in organizations 
for promoting the cause of the Slave in the world at large. It 
remains to give a further sketch of their proceedings in regard 
to this matter and particularly of such as relate to their con- 
nection with organizations of the above description, down to a 
more recent period. But before proceeding it may be proper 



24 INTRODUCTION. 

to state, that the most remote hint of objection to Friends 
uniting with others in associated action, to promote the libera- 
tion of the slave, cannot, so far as I have been able to ascer- 
tain, be found in the records or documents of the Society of 
those days — a time when their actions proved the sincerity of 
their professions — when it cost them something to be abolition- 
ists ; — not merely a good name and honorable standing in the 
world, but, in many instances, a considerable portion of their 
estates also. 

How long the Society for Pennsylvania " For Promoting the 
Abolitition of Slavery," and others of a similar character in 
other States, remained efficient bodies, I have, at present, no 
means of determining. In answer to a letter of inquiry, ad- 
dressed to my friend, Arnold Buffum, of New York, on the 
above and other subjects, I received the following, which I 
deem proper to insert at large, as his testimony to certain 
facts and circumstances relative to the matter in hand. 

New York, Fifth Month 29th, 1851. 
Walter Edgerton : — 

My Dear Friend. — Thy letter making some inquiries rela- 
tive to the position which the Society of Friends have occu- 
pied on the Slavery question, came duly to hand, and was 
read with pleasure. I very much regret, that by two fires, I 
have lost a large portion of the documentary evidence which I 
once possessed on this subject. 

It has been to me a most sorrowful reflection, that the time 
ever was, when a religious body making the high and holy 
profession which we do, should have tolerated " trading in 
slaves and souls of men." Such, however, was the fact, and 
many "Friends" were slaveholders; and when, in the pro- 
gress of light, there was raised up in our religious body one 
individual, who saw, felt, and proclaimed that it was a sin for 
a man to claim and exercise a chattel ownership of another 
man's body, and to take from him the God-given right of pur- 
suing his own happiness, this holy apostle of freedom, for 
having proclaimed this truth, was repudiated by his brethren, 
and excommunicated from the fellowship of the Society, furnish- 
ing undisputable evidence, that a high profession is not a sure 
indication of high attainments, in moral perception or in a 
Christ-like life. 



INTRODUCTION. 25 

But the attention of the disinterested and conscientious por- 
tion of the Society having been drawn to a contemplation of 
the sin of oppression, the conviction became established in 
their minds, not merely that it was a sin to hold men in slav- 
ery, but that it is equally sinful in the sight of God, to witness 
these abominations existing around us, and to make no effort 
for their abolition. The subject was brought up and discussed 
in all the Yearly Meetings, and the friends of humanity kept 
up a constant and active agitation, until the whole body was 
brought under the power of Divine truth, and freedom was 
proclaimed to all their slaves. Blessed be the memory of those 
faithful followers of Him who came to preach deliverance to 
the captives, they persevered in their labors of love— organ- 
ized abolition societies in connection with the friends of hu- 
manity of other sects — poured out the thunder of truth upon 
the sin of oppression, until the public sentiment of the whole 
community was so regenerated, that Slavery was abolished in 
a majority of the original slave-holding States of this Union. 
In England too, individual members of our religious Society 
commenc* d the Anti-Slavery movement ; there, too, they 
united with others, in anti-slavery organizations, and many of 
the purest and most eminent Christians that the Society of 
Friends has ever produced, devoted their untiring energies to 
the great cause of Slavery abolition ; and the first movers in 
the cause, lived to witness the blessing of God upon their 
labors of love, in the emancipation of a million of bondsmen. 

The Yearly Meeting of Friends in London, in 1830, in 
their General Epistle, after commenting on the wickedness of 
Slavery, Intemperance, and War, gave the following advice : 
H We recommend to our members individually, to unite with 
their fellow-countrymen in the measures now in progress, for 
the removal of these evils." A more rational or Christ-like 
sentiment never emanated from any body of men on the face 
of the earth. It is in perfect accordance with all the preach- 
ing and all the example of our Holy Redeemer. He always 
practiced and directed administration to the relief of the dis- 
tressed, with no toleration for any delay. The orthodox 
Yearly Meetings of Friends in this country, all adopted and 
re-printed that Christian Epistle from London, and it was sent 
out through all the branches of the Society in this land. I 
read it, and having had my Anti-slavery feelings somewhat 
warmed into life, by a considerably extensive intercourse with 



26 INTRODUCTION. 

Friends in England, I felt it to be my duty to act in accordance 
with the counsel thus put forth by the whole body of orthodox 
Friends, both in Europe and America ; and without hesitation, 
and I am happy to say, without any subsequent regret, I united 
myself with eleven of my " fellow-countrymen/' in organizing 
the first of the modern Anti-slavery Societies. The old Rhode 
Island Abolition Society, of which my father was a member 
before I was born, and of which I also had been a member, 
had been consigned to the tomb, by the influence of cotton 
and Colonizationism during my absence in Europe, and at the 
commencement of the year 1831, we were able to find only 
twelve persons prepared to unite in reviving the Anti-slavery 
agitation. We remembered what God had caused it to be 
written, that " whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, 
he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard ;" and we 
were led to contemplate the mournful fact, that there were two 
millions of our countrymen suffering under the most cruel op- 
pression — that they were so poor, that they owned no tongues 
or lips to tell the story of their sufferings and wrongs ; or to 
send up their cry to the ears of the people ; and we felt that 
God had blessed us with voices to utter their cry, and we 
dared not " keep in the quiet," in view of this awful wicked- 
ness. My friends tried to persuade me, to " keep out of all 
excitements and commotions/ 7 and threatened me with ex- 
communication, if I persisted in pleading the cause of the 
enslaved ; but I remember with joy, the reply which I gave 
them, when I decided that I would persevere in advocating 
the cause of those who were not permitted to plead for them- 
selves. I regarded my responsibility toward the slave, as 
similar to that of Dives toward Lazarus, and I felt that if I 
left them to the mercy of dogs, I must cry in vain, for the 
poor slave to come from Abraham's bosom to cool my tongue. 
I saw a field open in the West, and I heard a voice saying to 
me, " Go into the field and labor ;" and in my compliance 
with this command, my only regret is, that I was not better 
qualified for so important a mission, and that I was not more 
devoted and faithful to the cause. I bless God, that I found 
there a chosen few, who received me as one that had come to 
bring to their ears the cry of the poor ; and who regard the 
command of Christ, to love our neighbor as ourselves, as of 
higher obligation than any rules of expediency adopted for 
the sake of popular applause or of worldly gain. 



INTRODUCTION. 27 

The Society of Friends in England, as a body and individu- 
ally, continue in active co-operation with their fellow-country- 
men, for the advancement of the cause of the Redeemer's 
kingdom among men, laboring in accordance with the true 
faith, that when the obstructions which men have interposed 
shall be removed, God will grant that holy prayer which Jesus 
instructed his disciples to pray ; and His kingdom will come, 
and His will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. In this 
faith, Friends in England feel the responsibility resting upcn 
them, to persevere in untiring labors for the abolition of viol- 
ence, oppression, and wrong ; regarding this as man's portion 
of the great work, preparatory to the coming of that glorious 
day, when " all men shall see eye to eye, and God shall be all 
and in all.** 

In America, I am sorry to say, the position at present occu- 
pied by the " Friends as a body," is very different. The love 
of popular approbation in a sinful slave-holding nation, has 
closed the hands and the mouths, and I fear, the consciences 
cf a large portion of those who still use the language and 
wear the garb of Quakerism ; and they seem to have adopted 
the idea, that being themselves well off in the world, they 
are under no obligation to trouble themselves with the suffer- 
ings of others, and therefore, they have resolved to " settle 
down in the quiet, and keep out of all excitements and com- 
motions." It is more in accordance with their faith, to follow 
the example of the by-passing priest and Levite, than to go 
like the good Samaritan, to the relief cf the three millions of 
their own countrymen who have fallen among thieves. They 
seem to regard their Church organization, as the builders of 
Babel regarded their tower, merely as a ladder to carry them- 
selves to Heaven, instead of an organization of united strength 
for warring upon the abominations which abound in the world. 
I thank God, that there are noble exceptions to this general 
rule, and I pray that the faithful ones scattered over the land, 
may never falter. The day will soon come, when the lan- 
guage will come to us individually — " Inasmuch as ye have 
done it, or have not done it, unto one of the least of these, ye 
have done it, or have not done it unto me." 

"We have, in the signs of the times, abundant encourage- 
ment to persevere. Twenty years ago, no man in Congress 
dared to open his mouth against Slavery. Look at the change ; 
senators and representatives are now elected in various states^ 






28 IHTEODUOTIOH. 

expressly on the ground of opposition to Slavery ; and every 
day the abominations of that " peculiar institution," are be- 
coming more observed and more abhorred ; the slaves are 
fleeing to a land of freedom, in the dominions of Queen Vic- 
toria ; and the slave-holders are becoming terribly alarmed, 
lest, becoming civilized and educated, they shall return to the 
South armed with power to demand the liberation of their en- 
slaved brethren. 

Slavery or freedom for the laboring population of America, 
has become the great agitating question of the press, the 
stump, the legislative halls, and the pulpit ; and no subtlety or 
contrivance can stop this agitation, so long as any portion of 
the American people are held in bondage. Let us give no 
sleep to our eyes, nor slumber to our eyelids, until we feel 
that we have done our day's work, for the advancement of this 
holy cause. If we never meet again in this world, let us se- 
cure to ourselves an abiding hope, that we shall meet with all 
the friends of humanity in that better world, where there is 
no oppression, nor any disposition to cover up or tolerate 
crime ; and to God be all the glory. 

With increasing affection and love, I remain thy friend, 

Arnold Buffum. 

That those original Anti-Slavery societies continued for a 
considerable time to exert a salutary influence upon the public 
mind, is quite evident. Indeed, the manumission movement of 
Tennessee and North Carolina, may be considered as having 
emanated, at least in some degree, from the Anti-slavery feel- 
ing thus engendered. 

The manumission organization took its rise in Tennessee, in 
the year 1815; and the next year was extended into North 
Carolina. This organization was likewise composed in part, of 
Friends, and those too, of the most worthy in the Society. 

Shortly after the establishment of this organization, that is, 
in the year 1816, the American Colonization Society was 
formed, having for its object the removal of the free people of 
color from the United States, to some distant part of the world. 
The institution of this society, was one of the severest blows 
the cause of the poor African had ever received. It was ori- 
ginated by slave-holders, and for the purpose of draining the 
country of its free colored population ; and in order that they 
might be the more secure in the possession of their human 



INTRODUCTION. 29 

chattels. It however was, and still is, a Janus-faced institu- 
tion. In the South, it claimed not to interfere in the least, 
with the relation of master and slave ; but in the North, it 
claimed to be the only feasible means by which our country 
was eventually to be purged from Slavery, and heathen Africa 
Christianized ! Thus, with its false pretenses, many honest 
and philanthropic, but short-sighted individuals, were induced 
to give it their countenance and support. Many Friends 
united with others — even with slave-holders in the effort ; and 
North Carolina Yearly Meeting itself, at a certain time, con- 
tributed largely to its funds. 

The object, with its original projectors, as we have seen, 
was to clear the country of its free colored population ; and 
as they were of a class that had robbed their fellow-men of 
all their rights, they were not such as would be likely to be 
very scrupulous in what way they effected their object. Ac- 
cordingly, we find the most prominent men in that organiza- 
tion, engaged in venting bitter denunciations against that 
oppressed people, stigmatizing them as the " vilest of nuis- 
ances/' a " pest to the country, " etc., etc. Thus, through its 
agents and its public men, this Society labored assiduously to 
create a prejudice against this people, already so deeply in- 
jured : and having succeeded in imbittering the minds of the 
great mass of the American people against them, it then pro- 
claimed, trumpet-tongued, that the prejudices in this country 
against the poor negro were so great, that it was impossible for 
him ever to be elevated here, and, therefore, he must be sent 
away ! And now, while I write, this is the universal language 
and argument of Colonizationists. This idea, that the slaves 
must not be pet free, and remain here, was, and still is, the 
grand foe to freedom, especially in the North. Some fifteen 
years back it could have been said, I believe in truth, that 
every party in politics, and every religious denomination in the 
United States, were more or less contaminated by this baleful 
influence, and many of them perfectly cold and lifeless, as to 
any feeling for the sufferers. It had much to do in producing 
the Separation, the history of which we are to trace, as the 
documents I shall introduce will clearly show. In some of 
these documents, the character and purposes of the Coloniza- 
tion Society will be, incidentally, more fully examined. 

But to return from this digression ; as before stated, many 
Friends of Tennessee and North Carolina were actively en- 
2* 



30 IKTKODUCTIOK. 

gaged in the manumission enterprise. They appeared to have 
no fear of compromising their principles by associating with 
others in the good work, or by allowing their meeting-houses 
to be u?ed by such an organization. There are now living 
witnesses who will testify, that Friends were so completely 
identified with, and in favor of, the manumission cause in those 
days, that meetings of the organization were appointed to be 
held in Friends' meeting-house ', without the least idea of even 
asking for them ; and it is distinctly recollected that, at a cer- 
tain time, a meeting for Ministers and Elders left the meeting- 
house in which they were assembled, and retired to a school- 
house in order to accommodate a meeting of this description. 

Before leaving this part of the narrative, I will record one 
other circumstance. 

The Manumission Society at first adopted a rule to exclude 
all slave-holders from membership therein. Some of the slave- 
holders, as has since been evident, in order to defeat the pro- 
ject, professed to wish to become members of the association. 
The case was brought before that body, and a change in con- 
stitution advocated, as affording an excellent means of increas- 
ing their usefulness by increasing their membership ; and, 
finally, was adopted and slave-holders admitted. This done, 
another proposition for innovation soon followed, and that was 
to change the name, and, consequently, the character of the 
Association — that it should be denominated the " Manumission 
and Colonization Society." This project succeeded also, which 
soon terminated the existence of an institution which was 
originally designed to promote the unconditional emancipation 
of the slave; the moral power of which, slave-holders and 
their allies, were astute enough to comprehend, and compre- 
hending, most ingeniously to overthrow — a verification of the 
Scripture declaration, that " the children of this world are 
wiser in their generation than the children of light." 

Charles Osborne, now no more, being a member of the 
organization, was in the meeting when the proposition was 
made to change its name and character. He was not deceived 
by the false pretenses of the colonization scheme, and its in- 
terested and heartless advocates. He stood up against it, and 
voted against it alone ; of the peolpe none were with him. 

A number of Friends having removed from those states and 
settled here in Indiana, brought their Anti-slavery principles 
and feelings with them, and, consequently, meetings having for 



INTBODUCTIOH. 31 

their object the liberation of the slave, were held in different 
parts of the country ; some as early as between the years 
1815 and 1820. 

Friends' meeting-houses were used for such purposes, at 
White Water and other places, without the least hesitation. 
No one then appeared to have any apprehensions for the con- 
sequences of such a course. 

Let us now turn back and take a further view of the action 
of Friends on the other side of the Atlantic. We left them at 
the close of the struggle for the abolition of the slave-trade 
under the British government. 

By a union of a number of philanthropists of Great Britain* 
in which were included eminent members of the Society of 
Friends, elders and ministers of the Gospel, the British and 
Foreign Anti-slavery Society sprung into existence. 

None who are acquainted with the history of the abolition 
of slavery in the British West Indies, can, for a moment, 
doubt the great good resulting from the united action of Friends 
and others in promoting that object. It was while Friends in 
England were engaged in these philanthropic efforts, that the 
advice quoted by Arnold Buffum, on a previous page, from 
the London Yearly Meeting's General Epistle, was issued. 
They were in the midst of a noble, though arduous struggle 
for the right: the liberty of a million of human beings was the 
prize to be won. They had toiled and labored in the cause ; 
they had listened to, and thought of the wrongs of the slave, 
till their feelings were aroused, and they had remembered, at 
least in degree, those in bonds as bound with them ; and call- 
ing to mind that in the United States a^one, more than two 
millions of Africa's children were in a like degraded and suf- 
fering condition, no marvel they gave that advice. It was but 
the outpouring of benevolence and sympathy for the sufferers, 
from the deep fountain of their heart which, like the pool of 
Bethesda, had received that agita'ion from a heavenly hand, 
which made it a fountain of life and health to those poorest of 
the poor, (more forlorn than "halt, lame, of blind,") who 
were within the sphere of its influence. By its benign power, 
eight hundred thousand souls in the West Indies, were in one 
day, the 1st day of Eighth month, 1838, lifted from this hor- 
rible pit of pollution, the degraded condition of things, of pro- 
perty, chattels personal, and exalted to the station of men and 



32 INTRODUCTION. 

women, to a condition a little lower than the angels, to be 
crowned with glory and honor. This work, let me repeat, was 
effected by the cordial co-operation of such Friends as William 
Allen, William Forster, Josiah Forster, Joseph Sturge, George 
Stacey, etc., etc., with other Christian professors. And they 
labored, too, as we have already seen, not merely with the 
consent of London Yearly Meeting, but in accordance with its 
advice and earnest recommendation. 

We have now presented a concise history of the action of 
Friends from the first, both in England and America, touching 
the subject of Slavery. The reader, I trust, will now be ena- 
bled, understandingly, to peruse the following pages, embracing, 
as they do, a history and record of some of the principal facts 
and circumstances which produced the Separation, together 
with the arguments used, and the positions taken on both sides, 
and thereby be prepared readily to decide who were and are 
the separatists, and who contending for the testimony of the 
Society of Friends ; who had precedent and ancient usage on 
their side, and who opposed it ; who were contending against 
spiritual wickedness in high places, and who connived at it. 



A HISTORY 



SEPARATION IN INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF TRENDS. 



CHAPTEE I. 

The origin of the scheme of Immediate and Unconditional Emancipa- 
tion, and the Anti-slavery movement based thereon — The approval 
of that movement and its advocates by the Yearly Meeting — Its 
change and opposition to that cause, etc. 

The Anti-slavery movement which seems to have occa- 
sioned the difficulties in the Yearly Meeting, had its ori- 
gin in the year 1832, in Boston. 

The American Colonization Society, through its agents 
and emissaries, in the fifteenth or sixteenth years of its 
existence, had, by this time, so far succeeded in accom- 
plishing its object, that twelve individuals were all that 
could be found who were willing to unite in an Anti-Sla- 
very organization. In 1833, a national organization was 
founded in the city of Philadelphia, under the denomin- 
ation of " The American Anti-Slavery Society." This 
organization and that alluded to, formed in Boston the 
year before, took an important step quite in advance of 
any previous Anti-Slavery organization. "While all others 
had advocated a system of gradual emancipation, these 
boldly took the ground that nothing short of immediate 
and unconditional freedom to all, could satisfy the de- 
mands of justice, and fulfill the righteous law of God — 
that as slavery was a sin, it was the duty of all engaged 



84 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

in it, to cease immediately, and that there could be 
nothing to fear from the consequences of so doing. 

In order that the reader may have a clear understand- 
ing of what may be presented, it will be proper to re- 
mark, that this doctrine, and the Colonization scheme, 
each had its advocates in the Yearly Meeting for some 
years previous to the Separation. Not that any willingly 
owned themselves in favor of driving from the country 
the free colored inhabitants, yet they favored the Colon- 
ization Society, and contributed to its support ; and we 
have already seen what was the tendency of the policy 
of that society. Hence, those who supported that insti- 
tution, supported the cruel work of expatriation, however 
ignorant they might have been of the fact. Yet all were 
not entirely ignorant ; there was undoubtedly a feeling 
coincident with that engendered by the society, which 
manifested itself in such expressions as these, which 
were not unfrequently heard: "I am opposed to the 
slaves being set free here amongst us ;" u would it not be 
better for them to have a place somewhere to themselves," 
etc., etc. 

The first public expression of the Yearly Meeting 
which I find on record, shows the advocates of uncondi- 
tional emancipation in the ascendency at that time. It 
was in the year 1836, and in the following language : 

" We feel ourselves called upon at this time, affection- 
ately and tenderly, to caution our dear Friends to take 
no part in, nor render any aid to, any political associa- 
tion on the subject of African Slavery, which is, or 
may be founded on principles either directly or indirectly, 
having a tendency to promote the unrighteous work of 
expatriation, it being our settled conviction, that this 
work as a condition to the slaves being set at liberty, is 
unjust and oppressive." 

This clearly and emphatically condemns the Coloniza- 
tion scheme, and sanctions unconditional emancipation. 

As the above shows the leading influences of the Meet- 
ing at the time to be against the efforts of colonization- 
ists, the following extract from the same epistle, will give 



INDIANA YEAELY MEETING OF FBIENDS. 35 

the reader an idea with what class of our fellow-country- 
men they sympathized, and who they wished to encour- 
age : 

t; It is a satisfaction to us, to learn that there are many 
now in our much beloved country, who, though not mem- 
bers of our religious society, are awakened to a lively 
sense of the iniquity and horrors of Slavery, as now 
existing in these United States, and are made willing to 
become on gospel principles, the open advocates for 
suffering and degraded humanity, and are laboring on 
the ground which we as a religious society have for many 
years occupied, in relation to this subject; and we desire 
to encourage them in the good work of promoting mercy, 
righteousness and peace in the earth ; and we do most 
affectionately desire that all our dear friends may be so 
alive to our testimony against Slavery, that none may 
through prejudice or otherwise, cast any discouragements 
in the way of such as are faithfully laboring to promote 
universal emancipation, whether such laborers be found 
within or without the pale of our Society." 

The next year, 1837, the Yearly meeting went further, 
and urged its members to Anti-Slavery action, thus : 

" And a concern has been felt to arise, that Friends 
generally may be stirred up to renewed diligence, in 
faithfully maintaining our testimony against Slavery, not 
shrinking therefrom on account of opposition or the fear 
of persecution ; but that we may individually be willing 
in true simplicity, to inquire whether there is not some- 
thing for us to do for this suffering portion of our fellow- 
creatures. We do not wish any to engage in active 
measures on any other ground than a sense of duty, and 
in accordance with our well-known principles, yet we 
would encourage all to a close examination as to what 
is required at their hands, and how they may employ the 
talents committed to them for noble purposes in the ad- 
vancement of the blessed work of emancipation, by 
meekly, yet boldly, either publicly or privately pleading 
the cause of the oppressed.' 5 

The Anti-Slavery party, as will appear in the sequel, 



So HISTOBY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

very naturally took this, not merely as permission, but 
as earnest advice, to labor in the Anti-Slavery cause, and 
claimed that in so doing, they were strictly in the order 
of Society, even in not shrinking therefrom on account 
ot opposition, which arrayed itself so powerfully against 
them when the colonizationists gained the ascendency. 

At the Yearly Meeting in 1838, the condemnation of 
the Colonization scheme was received even in more 
energetic and decisive language, and a just admonition 
administered to Friends, not to give it countenance or 
support. 

" Fearing," say they, " that there are those of our 
members occupying and contending for grounds that are 
not in full accordance with our well-known testimonies 
on this important subject, by too much countenancing 
the policy of the day, which denies to that class of our 
fellow-beings (colored people,) the capacity of enjoying 
the natural rights of man, only on terms of expatriation, 
or some tedious plan of preparation, we earnestly invite 
Friends to renewed exertion on behalf of suffering hu- 
manity, by endeavoring to spread the concern, and en- 
lighten the minds of the people, by giving circulation to 
such publications as are calculated to advance the cause 
of immediate emancipation on Christian principles. 

" Our religion is a pure and holy religion ; it is 
founded on principle, and not on expediency ; it is 
founded on the policy of the gospel, and not on the 
policy of the world ; it requires us to do unto others as 
we would they should do unto us. Hence, we admit, 
without any conditions, the full enjoyment of liberty to 
be the right of all. And we cannot consent upon any 
contingency that the bondage of a fellow-being shall be 
prolonged for a single day. We cannot say to him, he 
must go to Hayti, to Liberia, or any other place, to en- 
title him to the full enjoyment of his freedom." 

In 1839, the same subject was brought to view. After 
expressing a belief that there was an increasing interest 
and concern felt in the minds of many Friends to pro- 
mote the entire abolition of Slavery, the Yearly Meeting 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 37 

said: " Yet, we believe there are amongst us in almost 
every department of Society," those whose minds are too 
indifferent on this important concern, and some others 
who are more actively engaged, who are obstructing the 
progress of our testimony by the doctrine of expediency, 
and that policy by which it is proposed to remove the 
colored population from our country, thereby contributing 
to the support of that unchristian prejudice which denies 
to the colored man privileges that we claim for ourselves; 
professing much opposition to Slavery, and at the same 
time attaching burdensome conditions to their plan of 
emancipation. 

" We desire, in brotherly love, to remind such, that our 
testimony against Slavery is purely a religious testimony, 
founded on the principles of the Gospel, which requires 
that we should do unto others as we would that they 
should do unto us — that we should break every yoke, 
undo the heavy burden and let the oppressed go free. 

" We would affectionately exhort all our dear friends 
everywhere, to zealously maintain our Christian testi- 
mony against Slavery, embracing every suitable oppor- 
tunity to strengthen and encourage the friends of this 
most righteous cause to stand firm and fear not, although 
the enemy may boast himself for a season ; for if the 
Lord be for us, who shall be against us ?" 

Clearly as the foregoing extracts show the friends of 
immediate and unconditional emancipation to have held 
a controlling influence in the Yearly Meeting at the time 
of their adoption, yet it was well known there was a 
large number of Friends opposed to the views and senti- 
ments therein contained — with them they went down 
roughly. Hence, every opportunity was improved to 
change the current of feeling in the Society, against that 
" most righteous cause," unconditional emancipation. 
Some of the friends of this cause entertained the idea, 
when the subject was first brought before the Meeting, 
that is, in 1836, that it would not be best for Friends to 
associate with other people for its promotion. Charles 
Osborne was one of this number. It was proposed at that 



38 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 

time that members be advised to refrain from snch con- 
nection. Other friends of the cause, aware of the use 
which would eventually be made of such advice, opposed 
its adoption. They saw that it would in all probability 
be converted into a weapon against the cause itself. 

The Colonization party, no doubt aware of the advan- 
tage that might be taken of that advice, to sink the Anti- 
Slavery cause in public estimation, especially as it was, 
if not in direct terms, in fact against Friends becoming 
members of Abolition societies, joined in advocating its 
adoption, and thus it carried. The language used how- 
ever, was very mild. 

" It is with feelings of much tenderness that we ven- 
ture to suggest to your consideration whether the time 
has not arrived in which it will be most safe for members 
of our religious Society to refrain from becoming mem- 
bers of other societies, though their object in relation to 
this important subject (universal emancipation), may be 
in strict accordance with our own. 5 ' 

Had the advice in relation to associating with others, 
remained in the above form, the Anti-Slavery party 
claimed . l at no difficulty would have arisen. But this, 
as was foreseen, was only the starting point. In 1838, 
at the instigation of the Colonization and anti-Abolition 
party, it was placed in more objectionable language. 

It says : " our standard of morality and religion is a 
high and holy standard ; in associating with others not 
of our Society for promoting benevolent objects, this 
standard has often been lowered ; — something objection- 
able may have been adopted — some peculiarity we deem 
it important to maintain, may have been abandoned. 
We deem it best for these and other reasons, that our 
friends abstain from mixing in these associations. 

As the above extracts from the Minutes of the Yearly 
Meeting at the different dates, are more or less discussed 
in the documents hereafter inserted, the reader is re- 
ferred to [ .em for further information relative to the dif- 
ferent viev^B and positions of the parties. 

About this time, that is, in 1838 and 1839, the rapid 



INDIANA YE ABLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 39 

increase of Anti-Slavery associations excited the special 
attention of the ever-watchful eye of Slavery. The in- 
tercourse existing between the slave-holders of the South 
and the non slave-holders of the North, was various and 
complicated; and especially in the eastern cities, among 
the wealthy and influential. But the commerical inter- 
course between the parties had, without doubt, the most 
powerful influence. Slave-holders began to manifest a 
most inveterate hatred toward the movement ; and it be- 
came a matter of interest with the merchants, manufac- 
turers, etc., of those cities, as they thought, to denounce 
the Abolitionists in order to ingratiate themselves into 
the special favor of their southern customers, and thereby 
secure their patronage. This class comprised a number 
of Friends of wealth and influence in the Society, in that 
part of the country. 

If one wished to encounter a bitter opponent of the 
Anti-Slavery movement, he had but to go to a Friend, a 
proprietor of a large manufacturing establishment, to be 
sure to find one. Friends, as well as others of the mer- 
cantile and manufacturing community, looked upon that 
movement as one calculated to deprive them of the means 
of amassing wealth. They looked to the slave-holders 
for their supplies of cotton, rice, sugar, etc., and in re- 
turn to furnish them with their manufactured articles and 
goods of all descriptions; and fancied that if the project 
of the Aboltionists was not arrested, u their craft, by 
which they had their wealth," would be in danger. 
Their opposition to the Abolitionists was much upon the 
same ground as that of the craftsmen of Ephesus to the 
apostle Paul and his companions. True, they did not so 
much cry out " great is Diana of the Ephesians " — great 
is American Slavery, as " abominable and fanatical " 
were all those who labored to turn the American people 
against this wicked institution. Nothing could be said 
too hard against them — nothing too false to put in circula- 
tion about them. And this opposition, as before intima- 
ted, originated in the higher class of community, among 
" those of property and standing;" but it met with a 



40 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

hearty response from the low and vicious rabble, in nu- 
merous acts of mobocratic violence, in the destruction of 
halls and printing-presses devoted to the cause of free- 
dom. This influence or prejudice, in the Eastern States, 
at the time of which we are speaking, was so strong and 
so overwhelming that our transatlantic Friends on Gospel 
Missions were completely duped thereby, and made to 
believe that the " Abolitionists were men of blood " and 
violence, and that they designed to involve the country 
in a servile war, etc., etc., and were induced to give cur- 
rency to these slanders in the course of their travels 
through the country : and this, too, from those whose 
duty it was, according to their profession, instead of so 
doing, to do all in their power to bind up the broken 
hearted, proclaim liberty to the captives, and the open- 
ing of the prison to them that were bound. They all, 
either joined in this, the very same hue and cry with 
which the venerable Clarkson and his noble compeers 
were assailed, or took side with those who did. There 
is no exception to these remarks, that I am aware of, 
among Friends in the ministry who visited us from be- 
yond the water. Joseph Sturge and John Candler, who 
were not of this class, to their honor be it recorded, stood 
above the reach of this cruel and withering influence. 
Some demonstration of this, in regard to the former indi- 
vidual, will appear anon. This, then, was the general 
character of public sentiment both " within and without 
the pale of Society n in the East, in 1838 and 1839, and 
for several years after. 

In 1840 Arnold Buffum came to this State for the pur- 
pose of holding meetings among the people, to talk about 
the wrongs and sufferings of the slave, and to endeavor 
to excite an interest in his behalf. 

The opposition which he encountered in the East, as 
one of the little band who dared undertake to revive the 
Anti-Slavery agitation, was made to follow him to the 
West, in the shape of letters of a personally defamatory 
character; and this could have been for no other purpose 
than to prevent his having an influence with the people. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OE FRIENDS. 41 

Abolitionists, among whom he was a prominent one, 
were Represented to Friends here, by their eastern breth- 
ren, as the most odious of characters. 

It may be proper to state, that a number of Friends 
who were in favor of unconditional emancipation, had, 
as early as 1836, joined with others in the formation of 
the State Anti-Slavery Society of Indiana, and were well 
acquainted with the principles and aims of the Abolition- 
ists ; hence these aspersions were keenly felt by them, 
yet they felt that the Yearly Meeting was on their side, 
or at least, had been for years past. The opposition 
party, however, was greatly strengthened by this foreign 
influence, and accordingly, feeling somewhat emboldened, 
in the Sixth month, 1840, it so far succeeded in carrying 
out its designs as to procure the issuing of an Epistle of 
Advice by the Meeting for Sufferings, against Friends 
participating in the Anti-Slavery enterprise, as well as 
that of Colonization ; thus placing them on the same 
ground. As it was well known that the Yearly Meeting 
had openly condemned the Colonization scheme, the 
friends of that project could look for no retraction in that 
case ; hence they contented themselves with trying to ob- 
tain a like condemnation of the Anti-Slavery movement, 
which they did ; and Friends were now advised not to 
join with others in Anti-Slavery associations. 

It ought to be borne in mind that there was a third 
party, if we may so speak, in the Yearly Meeting — a 
kind of neutrals, many of them very goodly Friends, but 
who, for lack of firmness or judgment, or perhaps both, 
were ready to turn any way to be with the current — to be 
in unity with what they conceived to be the leading in- 
fluences of the Society. This may account, in some 
degree, for the strange phase the Society now so sud- 
denly exhibited. 

The Anti-Slavery portion of Society witnessed this 
change with deep sorrow and concern. A number of 
them, however, confidently believed that when the 
Yearly Meeting convened, it would disapprove the pro- 
ceedings of the Meeting for Sufferings. They could not 



4:2 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

think that body could act, as they conceived, so inconsis- 
tent with its former professions as to indorse that docu- 
ment. But in this they were disappointed. 

Charles Osborne, who was one of the most prominent 
of the Anti-Slavery party, was absent on a religious visit 
to the East in the forepart of this year, 1840, and did 
not reach home till after the Meeting for Sufferings had 
issued the document alluded to above. From his own 
account he saw, while on this visit, the storm gathering 
thick and dark around him. Many of his brethren there 
could not brook the testimonies against Slavery which he 
felt called upon to bear, and essayed to put him to silence. 
Silence, then, was the watchword. They could find no 
fault with his principles, but "such preaching strength- 
ened the Abolitionists ;" he must, therefore, desist. But 
it appears he was preserved in faithfulness to his divine 
Master, amidst it all. 

That his testimonies had a tendency to strengthen the 
hands of Abolitionists, as anticipated, is very evident. 

The following stanza, from a poem written by J. G. W. 
on another occasion, was copied at the time into one of 
the journals of the day, as expressive of the feelings ex- 
cited in this class, on hearing, in a public meeting, the 
bold and unflinching testimony of our dear friend. 

Thank God for the token ! — one lip is still free — 
One spirit untrammeled — unbending one knee — 
Like the oak of the mountain, deep-rooted and firm, 
Erect, when the multitude bends to the storm ; 
"When traitors to Freedom, and Honor, and God, 
Are bowed at an idol polluted with blood ; 
"When the recreant North has forgotten her trust, 
And the lip of her honor is low in the dust, — 
Thank God that one arm from the shackle has broken ! 
Thank God that one man, as a freeman, has spoken ! 

When he reached home, he found the current had 
completely changed. The advocates of Colonization and 
opponents of the Anti-Slavery movement seemed in a 
most unaccountable manner to have entirely gained the 
ascendency. Submission to the advice, not to join with 
others in Anti-Slavery associations, was now strenuously 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 43 

demanded by this class ; but a number of the other 
party resisted it as altogether rong, and hence, as they 
thought, could not yield c; ience thereto. Their 
reasons will be found in documents inserted hereafter. 

The subject of abstaining from the productions of 
Slavery, is one that had claimed the attention of some 
of the more conscientious among Friends, from the days 
of J. Woolman, down to the period of the events under 
review. Charles Osborne was one, who, as early as 1818, 
advocated the propriety and necessity of such abstinence, 
in a periodical which he edited in Alt. Pier -ant, Ohio, 
under the title of " The Philanthropist." 

In the course of the investigations consequent upon 
the revival of the Anti-Slavery agitation, the duty of 
abstaining from articles produced by the extorted labor 
of the slave, presented itself in a forcible manner to the 
minds of many of the friends of unconditional emanci- 
pation, so much so, that in 1841, a monthly periodical 
denominated " The Free Labor Advocate and Anti- 
Slavery Chronicle," was started at Newport, in this 
State. A number of Free Labor societies of a local 
character had been formed, and much interest in the 
cause seemed to have been awakened in different places. 
The standing committee appointed by the Yearly Meet- 
ing, and the different Quarters, known as the Committee 
on the Concerns of the People of Color, had a subject 
before them in 1840, and recommended Friends of the 
different branches of said committee, to endeavor to as- 
certain what facilities existed for obtaining free labor 
goods, and report to the next general meeting of the com- 
mittee. This, to some extent, was attended to in one 
of the Quarterly meetings, and a communication was 
produced to the committee the next year, from Abraham 
L. Pennock of Philadelphia, detailing to some extent, 
the opportunities for obtaining such goods. But the 
change in the ruling influence to which I have already 
alluded, was such, that even the reading of this docu- 
ment produced according to instruction, was obtained 



44 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

with difficulty, and the whole movement on the subject 
endeavored to be quashed. 

A document was produced to this meeting of the com- 
mittee, from one of its branches, showing in a forcible 
manner, the necessity of Friends avoiding the purchase 
and consumption of articles produced by slaves. Its 
being introduced and read in that body, produced a most 
astonishing state of excitement therein. 

For further particulars, see the " Declaration " in 
another part of this work. 

That the reader may be able to judge of the merit or 
demerit of a document that produces such a state of feel- 
ing, I present it below. 



CHAPTEK II. 

" Report of a Sub -Committee of JSTew Garden branch of the Committee, 
on the Concerns of the People of Color. 

" The committee appointed on the subject of Abstin- 
ence from the use of Slave-labor Produce, having at dif- 
ferent times had the matter under solid consideration, 
agree to report : that we find, by examining the history 
of our Society, that religious scruples in respect to the 
use of slave-labor produce, were entertained by some of 
the early advocates of freedom ; and we believe that 
many Friends, both in Europe and America, have up to 
the present time, manifested a concern on this important 
subject; and some Friends have faithfully borne this 
testimony. And in a Society capacity, Friends have 
been advised to attend to their conscientious scruples on 
this subject. Yet, from some cause, it has never been so 
acted on as to bring it in as a testimony obligatory on 
our members. 

" The principal reason may have been, the great diffi- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 45 

culties that have always opposed themselves to such a 
testimony, and the trials and deprivations that it would 
bring upon us. And notwithstanding we have long 
since forbidden our members the privilege of purchasing 
slaves, or of hiring them of their respective masters, we 
have continued to participate freely in the purchase and 
use of the produce of the extorted labor of the slave; 
and slavery has not only continued, but has increased 
many fold. 

" And it appears to us, that our neglecting faithfully 
to maintain and carry out this testimony against Slavery 
in all parts, which would have led us to a refusal, as 
much as possible, of a participation in the spoils of op- 
pression, has very much contributed to the rendering of 
our testimony against this unrighteous system less avail- 
ing. 

" It is evident that they who purchase the produce of 
oppression, supply the means by which it is kept in ex- 
istence. It is the desire of money, that induces the 
master to drive the panting slave under the lash, to pro- 
duce a supply of those articles for which he can find a 
market. And just so far as we contribute to the gratifi- 
cation of our desires, so far we hire the master to continue 
his deeds of oppression. 

11 Now, is it not clear, that the right of the slave- 
holder to the proceeds of slave labor, is founded in his 
claim to the person of the slave, which had its origin in 
robbery ? And if the property claim to the person of 
the slave originated in robbery, is it not clear that its 
continuation through a succession of ages and genera- 
tions can never divest it of its original character ? And 
is it not equally clear, that the title to his labor is no 
better than the claim to his person ? 

u We are unable to perceive the difference in principle, 
between hiring from the slave-holder his slave, and com- 
pelling him to toil in our own fields, and purchasing the 
fruits of his toil, produced by extortion in the fields of 
his master. 

" In practice there is this difference ; in the former 



46 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

case, the slave would be under our own treatment ; and 
in the latter, we pay others for extorting his labor under 
the rigor of the lash of the cruel taskmaster. 

" If these views are correct, it will follow that the 
time has come when Friends should be convinced that 
consistency of conduct with the principles we profess, will 
lead us to a careful examination of the cause or causes, 
why our testimony against Slavery has been so ineffi- 
cient ; and should it be found that it has been owing in 
a great measure to our continuing to give it sanction and 
support, by hiring others to do that which we refuse to 
do ourselves, we certainly shall feel bound to refrain as 
much as possible from further participation in the fruits 
of oppression. 

a If, through inattention to our duties on this subject, 
our connection with the system has been such, that it is 
almost or quite impossible that we can entirely abstain 
from participating in the consumption of slave-grown 
produce, instead of its affording us an apology for a con- 
tinuance in thus giving our support to oppression, it 
should beget in us much earnest solicitude, that we might 
be enabled, even if it should be through much trial and 
deprivation, to clear our hands of the stain of this wicked 
system. 

" The committee feels something of the responsibility 
that should rest upon them in considering this important 
subject, but the importance of the occasion, seems to us, 
rather than otherwise, to demand of us an energetic and 
zealous examination, that we may be willing and anxious 
to know the depth of our guilt in this case ; that we no 
longer endeavor to satisfy our troubled consciences, with 
weak and deceitful excuses, such as that, ' I cannot see 
that my abstaining will do anything for the abolition of 
Slavery. 5 The abolition of Slavery should not be the 
only consideration in the examination of this question. 
The inquiry should be, is it morally right, thus to obtain 
and use the goods thus fraudulently obtained from the 
rightful owners ? And when we have fairly considered 
and answered this question, it will become our indispens- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 47 

able duty to act accordingly, leaving the consequences to 
Hirn who holds in his own hands the disposal of events, 
and who will do right. May we be enabled in the light 
of Truth, clearly to discover and faithfully to perforin our 
duty to all parties concerned ; and thus to stand acquitted 
in the sight of that just and Omnipotent Being who 
is no respecter of persons." 



CHAPTER III. 

Free Labor Convention at Spiceland — Proceedings of the Yearly 
Meeting against the Abolitionists. 

Notwithstanding the Anti-Slavery portion of Friends 
were thus repulsed and frowned down, they deemed 
faithfulness in the cause a matter of vital importance, 
not only in order to clear themselves of a participation 
in the sin of slave-holding, but as a means of enlisting 
the public mind against the system, and therefore could 
not abandon it. A large convention of Friends of 
Spiceland Quarterly meeting, was held at the time of 
that meeting preceding the Yearly Meeting in 1841, and 
the subject of the consumption of slave-labor produce 
was there pretty fully discussed. Many Friends then 
appeared to be quite alive and zealous in their opposi- 
tion to the practice. The convention closed with the 
full prospect of having a more general meeting of the 
Society, some time in the course of the week of Yearly 
Meeting. When, however, that time arrived, instead of 
there being a general meeting of this character held, the 
very idea of any such meeting was scouted, and its 
projectors indignantly frowned down. Were any to be 
appointed members of the Meeting for Sufferings, it was 
sufficient for disqualification of any one, to be known to 
be an Abolitionist, or in favor of joining with others 
to aid the cause of the slave. 



4:8 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

The clerk of the Women's Meeting was one of this 
number, and therefore the place she occupied must be 
filled by another in whom the meeting had confidence ; 
but she was required to sit by to render to the Meeting 
the aid Of her experience as clerk ; thus endeavoring to 
secure the advantages of her qualifications, while pub- 
licly and notoriously impugning her character as a 
Friend. All this, though keenly felt, was patiently sub- 
mitted to by the individual. 

Some of those who had been so zealous in the conven- 
tion spoken of, when they saw the amount of influence 
arrayed against the cause, turned immediately round and 
joined its opponents. Many others staggered, faltered, 
and finally stumbled over on to the same ground ; or at 
best, into a state of acquiescence. 

But to go back a little ; the Colonization and Anti- 
Abolition party now having gained the ascendency, and 
not satisfied with having prohibited members of Society 
from making any efforts for the relief of the bondman, 
in the Meeting for Sufferings of this year, 1841, issued 
the following prohibitory advice to Friends against grant- 
ing the use of their meeting-houses to accommodate Anti- 
Slavery meetings ; and the Yearly Meeting, when it con- 
vened, sanctioned the document, and copied it into its 
Minutes. As the reasons for issuing the advice are 
therein offered, I give the article entire. 

" To the Quarterly and Monthly meetings of Friends 
in Indiana Yearly Meeting, and to Friends individu- 
ally. 

" Information having reached this meeting that some 
of our meeting-houses have been opened for the purpose 
of holding Anti-Slavery meetings and delivering lectures, 
we feel concerned to advise against such a practice, as 
being contrary to the general usage of Society, and of 
hurtful tendency to our members. 

" The meeting has, also, been brought into painful 
concern on account of the publication and circulation by 
members of this Yearly Meeting, of a recent Address 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 49 

written by a member of our Society, on the subject of 
one of our important testimonies, but which had not un- 
dergone the examination of a Meeting for Sufferings, 
agreeably to the requisitions of our Discipline. As such 
acts may affect the reputation of our religious Society, 
and may disturb its harmony, which has been the case in 
the instance before us, we feel called upon to express our 
disapprobation of such proceedings. There are, also, 
some periodicals within our limits, conducted under the 
character and style of Friends, whose object seems to be 
the promotion and advancement of our testimony against 
Slavery ; but not being under our supervision, we cannot 
consistently give them our sanction, nor be responsible in 
any way for their contents. 

" And as the subject of Slavery is producing great ex- 
citement in our land, we again tenderly advise our dear 
friends, not to join in association with those who do not 
profess to wait for divine direction in such important con- 
cerns ; lest if we overact the part called for at our hands, 
we injure the righteous cause, and suffer loss ourselves; 
comparable to what is said of Ephraim of old, ' he mixed 
himself among the people,' 'strangers have devoured his 
strength and he knoweth it not.' 

" It is far from the wish of this meeting to induce, on 
the part of our members, an apathy of feeling on the 
deeply afflicting subject of Slavery. On the contrary, we 
desire that all may faithfully maintain this Christain tes- 
timony, and cherish a lively interest both for the op- 
pressed and the oppressors. Thus maintaining our 
peaceable and Christian principles in unbroken harmony, 
we shall, we believe, be enabled, as way may open, more 
availingly to plead the cause of this much-injured race 
of our fellow-men, and retain the place and influence 
which, as a Society, we have heretofore had with the 
rulers of our land. 

u Let us, therefore, abide under the weight of this con- 
cern, attentively watching for every right opening to 
move therein, in our united capacity, and thus, too, when 
clothed with the spirit of supplication, our petitions will 



60 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

be put up to the great Euler of the universe, that it may 
please him to hasten the day when Ethiopia shall stretch 
out her hands unto God, under the enjoyment of univer- 
sal liberty*" 

It may be proper to state that the address here alluded 
to, written by a member of our Society, is the production 
of Joseph Sturge, of England. And in order that the 
reader may be enabled to judge whether it is of a charac- 
ter to produce such consequences as attributed to it, I 
will here give it a place. As respects the assertion that 
holding Anti-Slavery meetings in our meeting-houses was 
" contrary to the general usage of Society," the reader 
has already been presented with proof to the contrary in 
the Introduction to the present work. 



CHAPTEE IV. 

Address of Joseph Sturge to Friends in the United States. 

" To the Members of the religious Society of Friends in 

the United States of America. 

" Dear Friends: — Having for many years believed it 
to be my duty to devote a considerable portion of my 
time and attention to the promotion of the abolition of 
Slavery and the Slave-trade, I have acted in cordial co- 
operation with the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery So- 
ciety since its foundation. The principles of that society 
may be briefly explained by the following extract from 
its constitution : c That so long as Slavery exists, there is 
no reasonable prospect of the annihilation of the Slave- 
trade, and of extinguishing the sale and barter of human 
beings ; that the extinction of Slavery and the Slave-trade 
will be attained most effectually, by the employment of 
those means, which are of a moral, religious, and pacific 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 51 

character ; and that no measures be resorted to by this 
Society, in the prosecution of its objects, but such as are 
in entire accordance with these principles.' 

u My visit to this country had reference, in a great 
measure, to the objects for which this Society was estab- 
lished. But although I left my native land with the gen- 
eral approbation and full unity of my friends, they con- 
curred with me in opinion, that any official document 5 
beyond a certificate from my Monthly meeting, expres- 
sive of sympathy with my engagement, might rather 
obstruct than promote the end I had in view. I was 
desirous of a personal interchange of sentiment with 
many of the Abolitionists in this land, upon matters hav- 
ing an important bearing upon our future exertions, 
The warm attachment which I have ever felt to the reli- 
gious Society with which I am connected, and the ready 
co-operation of its members with their Christian neigh- 
bors in promoting this cause in Great Britain, inclines 
me to embrace every suitable opportunity to communi- 
cate with Friends of this country, and I have been en- 
couraged, not only by the great personal kindness I have 
received from them generally, but also by the lively 
interest expressed by most on the subject of emancipation 
wherever I have introduced it. 

" A further acquaintance with Friends in the compass 
of three or four Yearly Meetings, in which my lot has 
been cast, and my inquiries respecting the state of other 
Yearly Meetings, has convinced me that a large number 
of their most consistent members, including many aged 
and universally respected Friends, are desirous of em- 
bracing every right opening, both individually and col- 
lectively, for the promotion of the abolition cause; and 
while they are fully aware that there are reasons growing 
out of the existing state of things, which render great 
circumspection necessary, they can see no good ground 
for believing that the manner in which Friends of this 
country of a former generation, labored for the liberation 
of the slave, was not under the guidance of the Spirit of 
Truth. 



52 HIST0BY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

" This is, now, the course pursued by Friends generally 
in England. That there may be no misapprehension as 
to the conduct of Friends with regard to this subject in 
Great Britain, I may mention that I am the bearer of a 
document expressive of unity with my visit, signed by 
William Allen, Josiah Forster, William Forster, George 
Stacey, Samuel Fox, George W. Alexander, and Robert 
Forster, who declare themselves fellow- members with 
myself of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Commit- 
tee ; this committee is composed of persons of various 
religious denominations, among whom, it will be seen, 
are many of the prominent members of our Meeting for 
Sufferings. Upon the list of delegates to the late Anti- 
Slavery Convention in London, are the names of nearly 
one hundred well-known Friends, including those of four 
who are, or have been, Clerks of the Yearly Meeting ; and 
the present clerk of that meeting, my esteemed friend, Geo. 
Stacey, took an active part, and rendered essential service 
in the convention. The meeting-house in Grace Church 
street, was freely granted by Friends in London, who 
have charge of it, for the use of the convention ; and the 
concluding sittings of that body were held in it. 

" In fact, Friends generally in England think it their 
duty to render every aid in their power to the Anti-Sla- 
very cause, whether in their collective capacity, or indi- 
vidually, uniting with their fellow-citizens, when they 
can do so without any compromise of our religious prin- 
ciples and testimonies. I speak more explicitly on this 
point, because I have ascertained, with much concern, 
that there is an influential portion of the Society, includ- 
ing, I have no doubt, many sincere Abolitionists, who 
have been so fearful that the testimonies of the Society 
might suffer by any union with others, that they have 
not only avoided such a co-operation themselves, but 
have dissuaded those of their brethren who believed it 
incumbent upon them to act otherwise ; and in one 
Yearly Meeting, at least, I have much reason to fear they 
have tacitly, if not actively, sanctioned the omission of 
the names of Friends on meeting appointments, however 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 53 

consistent in their conduct and concern for the welfare of 
Society, simjly because they Lave felt it their duty to act 
with persons of other denominations in promoting the 
abolition of Slavery. Thus, in appearance, at least, 
throwing the whole weight and influence of the Society 
in its collective capacity, against a movement which, 
although doubtless partaking of the imperfections atten- 
dant upon all human instrumentality, has already aroused 
the whole country to a sense of the wrongs of the slave, 
and secured to the nominally free colored citizens, in 
many of the States, rights of which they have been so 
long and so unjustly deprived. 

" Though I can hardly expect that anything from one 
entertaining my views of the subject, can have much 
weight w T ith those Friends, who, with a full understand- 
ing of the heavy responsibility they were assuming, have 
discountenanced Anti-Slavery exertions, and the use of our 
meeting-houses, even by consistent members, for the pur- 
pose of giving information on the subject ;* yet, as it has 
occasioned me no small degree of anxiety, both in refer- 
ence to the Anti-Slavery cause and the Society of Friends 
itself, I believe I cannot return to my native land with 
peace of mind, without earnestly and affectionately press- 
ing upon such Friends the great importance of a careful 
examination of the ground they have taken. Our un- 
wearied adversary is sometimes permitted to lead us into 
the most fearful errors, when he assumes the appearance 
of an angel of light. And is there not great danger in 
encouraging the young and inexperienced to suppose 
that the maintenance of any of our testimonies may be 
neglected, except when we feel a Divine intimation to 
uphold them % And may it not open the door to great 

* It is right to state that I was much encouraged by the lively expres- 
sion of sympathy in the Anti-Slavery cause, in the Yearly Meetings of 
Philadelphia and ]\ T ew York. That at the former place, Friends opened 
a room in the meeting-house for my friend, John Candler, to give some 
information on the subject; and at ^Tew York, the large meeting-house was 
not only readily granted to him and me for the same purpose, but the 
Clerks of the Yearly Meeting kindly gave notice and invited Friends to 
attend. 



54 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

laxity in our practice? While I fully believe that the 
true disciple of Christ will be favored with the immediate 
guidance of the Holy Spirit, whenever it is needful to 
direct his steps ; it appears to me especially important 
that, in matters of self-sacrifice, and conflicting with our 
worldly interest or reputation, we should guard against 
being deluded into a neglect of duty, by waiting for this 
direct, divine intimation, where the path of duty is obvi- 
ous and clearly understood, and when testimonies are 
concerned, which we have long considered it our duty on 
all occasions to support. If, under such a view of the 
subject, we do believe it to be our duty to cease to act 
ourselves, and discourage our brethren from laboring in 
the cause of the slave, a close examination surely is 
needful in order to ascertain if we are consistently carry- 
ing out the same principles in our daily walks in life — 
in our mercantile transactions — our investments of pro- 
perty — in our connection with public institutions, and 
with political parties. 

" It should be borne in perpetual recollection that we 
are in no small danger of shrinking from a faithful main- 
tenance of those testimonies which are unpopular with 
the world, as well as of not seeing our own neglect of 
duty, while censuring the real or supposed indiscretion 
of others. Beside, if this good cause be really endan- 
gered by popular excitement and the indiscretion of its 
imprudent advocates, the obligation of consistent Friends 
to be found at their posts, faithfully maintaining the tes- 
timony of Truth on its behalf, is greatly increased. And 
it is under such circumstances that I think I have seen 
peculiar advantage and protection to our young Friends 
in England, of having their elder brethren with them, 
aiding them by their sympathy as well as advice and 
counsel. I am persuaded that those who are called to 
occupy the foremost ranks in Society, cannot be too care- 
ful not to impose a burden upon tender consciences by 
discouraging, either directly or indirectly, a course of 
conduct which is sanctioned by the precepts and examples 
of our divine Master, lest they alienate from us some of 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FBIEKDS. 55 

his disciples, and thereby greatly injure the Society they 
are so laudably anxious to keep fc unspotted from the 
world. 5 

" We are told on the highest authority, that ' by their 
fruits' we are to judge of the laborers in the Christian 
vineyard ; and while I am aware of the greater difficul- 
ties in the way of emancipation here, as compared with 
Great Britain, I have been almost irresistibly led to con- 
trast the difference in the results of the course pursued 
by Friends in the two countries. In America, during 
the last twenty -five years, it is evident that Slavery and 
the Slave-trade have greatly increased, and even where 
the members of our Society are the most numerous and 
influential the prejudice against color is as strong as in 
any part of the world;* and Friends themselves, in many 
places, are by no means free from this prejudice. In 
Great Britain, Friends by Society action and by uniting 
with their fellow-countrymen, not only contributed, under 
Providence, in no small degree to the passage of the Act 
of 1831 for the abolition of Slavery in the British West 
Indies, but when it was found that the system of appren- 
ticeship which this act introduced, was made an instrument 
of cruel oppression to the slaves, a renewal of similar 
labors for about twelve months, resulted in the complete 
emancipation of our colored brethren in those colonies. 

u In closing this letter, I wish to address a few words 
to that numerous and valuable class of Friends, pre- 
viously alluded to, with whom I deeply sympathize, who 
are only deterred from more active exertion by their re- 
luctance to give dissatisfaction to those whom they 
respect. The sorrow which I feel under the consideration 
that in parting with many of you we never probably 
shall meet again in mutability, is softened by the persua- 
sion that the difficulties by which you are surrounded are 

* I should, I believe, do wrong to conceal the sorrow which I have felt 
that the scheme cf African Colonization, the great support of wMch at 
the present time appears to be hostility to Anti-Slavery efforts and an un- 
christian prejudice against color, still has the sympathy and the active 
aid of some members of our Society. 



56 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

lessening, and that some who are now opposing yon will 
ere long join you in efforts which shall remove from the 
minds both of Abolitionists and Slave-holders the belief 
so generally entertained, that the Society of Friends in 
this country are not earnestly engaged for the total and 
immediate abolition of Slavery. No one regrets more 
than myself that any friends to the cause of Abolition 
should connect other topics with it, which however suit- 
able to be discussed on their own merits must necessarily 
interfere with this simple and momentous object. You 
are aware of some of the circumstances which may have 
led to the state of feeling with many in our Society which 
we so much deplore. And it is my fervent desire that 
none of you, in any steps you may consider it your duty 
to take, may afford just cause of uneasiness by any com- 
promise of Christian principle, any improper harshness 
of language, or by the introduction of any subjects not 
strictly belonging to the Anti-Slavery cause. Your situ- 
ation is one of peculiar difficulty and delicacy. Both 
from a regard to your own religious Society and the suf- 
fering slave, you have need to exercise great watchful- 
ness, and to cultivate feelings of brotherly love, and that 
4 charity which suffereth long and is kind.' The beauti- 
ful example of John Woolman, in this respect, is worthy 
of your imitation. His labors were for years far less 
encouraged by the leading influences of Society than your 
own at the present time. Yet we find, in reading his 
invaluable journal, no traces of bitterness or uncharitable 
feeling. 

" Finally, dear friends of all classes, in thus freely 
addressing you I have written not only with a strong 
attachment to our religious Society, but 1 trust under a 
feeling of a degree of that love which is not confined to 
geographical boundaries or affected by color or by clime. 
The prayer of my heart is, that each of you may be will- 
ing to be made instrumental in the Divine hand in faith- 
fully maintaining our Christian testimony against Slavery; 
bearing in mind that the labors of your ancestors have 
greatly increased your responsibility by separating you 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 57 

from those influences which so deaden the feelings and 
harden the heart against the claims of our brethren in 
bonds. May these considerations, viewed in connection 
with the difficulties which obstruct the progress of eman- 
cipation in this laud, stimulate you to increased exertion. 
And when you are summoned to the bar of that final 
tribunal toward which we are all hastening, may you 
have the inexpressible consolation of reflecting that you 
have performed all you could toward ' undoing the heavy 
burdens and letting the oppressed go free. 5 

"I am, very sincerely, your friend, 

"Joseph Sturge. 

"New York, Seventh mo -. 17th, 1841." 



CHAPTER V. 

Completion of the measures by the Yearly Meeting in 1842, which pro- 
duced the Separation. 

The issuing of the advice to exclude Anti-Slavery meet- 
ings and lectures from our meeting-houses caused the 
deepest sensation in the Anti-Slavery ranks, not merely 
among Friends but all classes engaged in the work where- 
ever Friends were located. The Anti-Slavery portion of 
Society had witnessed with very painful interest the first 
marked dereliction from correct principle by the Yearly 
Meeting; but this measure was far more poignant to their 
feelings, inasmuch as Anti-Slavery meetings were therein 
represented to be of " hurtful tendency to our members;" 
the opposition thus showing itself to be not merely 
against associating with other people, but against the 
enterprise which Friends had been endeavoring to pro- 
mote by that association : and upon mature reflection 
they felt constrained to disobey the advice, knowing that 
the course urged was u contrary to the usage of Society;" 
being also well assured that it u would be of hurtful ten- 
dency to its members." Accordingly, wherever they had 



58 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

the control of meeting-houses, Anti-Slavery meetings were 
admitted as previously had been the case. 

It would seem now that the Yearly Meeting might 
have felt that it had cleared itself of the hateful stain of 
Abolitionism ; as it had thrown the whole weight of its 
influence against the movement ; but the proceedings of 
the next Yearly Meeting show the case to be different. 

Meanwhile, Friends were urged to submit to the advice 
of the body by Ministers, Elders, and Friends of every 
description, except those truly Anti-Slavery; but with 
various arguments. By some it was held that uncondi- 
tional submission was absolutely necessary to the exist- 
ence of religious society. By others, if the Meeting was 
wrong in its advice, we must submit and throw the re- 
sponsibility on the body. Others again contended posi- 
tively that the advice was just right and in accordance 
with the Divine Mind, and that we had but to submit to 
the spirit of Truth, to submit to it. Many urged that 
we had no right to move in advance of the body ; that 
admitting the Abolitionists to be correct, individuals 
should not move in the matter, till the Yearly Meeting 
was prepared for it — -that we should not even name the 
subject of abstinence as necessary to be attended to 
because the Yearly Meeting had not taken it up, etc. 
These views were urged with pertinacity in different 
parts of the Yearly Meeting. Before the commencement 
of the Yearly Meeting for business this year, 1842, the 
plan of operation to enforce submission appears to have 
been projected in secret session by a portion of the lead- 
ers; which was in substance, that no person " opposed 
to the advice and travail of the body," or in other words, 
who was an Abolitionist, should be appointed on any 
important business. At the opening of the Meeting, in 
order to carry it out, it was proposed and sanctioned, 
that names offered on committees should receive the 
sanction of several Friends before taken by the clerk. 

In the course of its sessions, the Meeting for Suffer- 
ings reported eight of their number as disqualified to fill 
the stations they occupied in that body ; because, as was 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 59 

well understood, they were opposed to the advices and 
proceedings alluded to above. The Yearly Meeting ap- 
proved its course, and addressed an " Epistle of Advice 
to subordinate meetings and to Friends individually," 
recommending those meetings, as will appear from the 
following extract, to carry out the same proscriptive 
policy to the remotest corner of Society: 

" We are again concerned to warn all our dear friends 
against joining or participating in the excitement and 
over-active zeal of the Anti-Slavery Societies, and to be 
cautious about the kind of reading admitted into their 
families, as the effect of all those books and papers must 
be pernicious which have the tendency to set one 
part of Society against another, to lessen the value of our 
religious testimonies in our estimation, or to make us set 
light by the restraints of the advices or discipline of our 
Society. Let such beware, who perceive that the popu- 
lar excitements of the day are producing these effects 
upon them, and seek quietness and retirement from these 
things before it be too late. 

" Friends are advised to be weighty and deliberate in 
making appointments to any of the important stations 
and committees in Society, so that faithful and trusty 
Friends may be chosen ; as we believe that those who 
have distinguished themselves by opposition or disregard 
to the advices and travail of the body, are manifestly un- 
suitable for important services in it, while they remain 
in that situation." 

The Anti-Slavery party alleged that if Friends were 
to follow the advice contained in a portion of the above, 
this Epistle could not be " admitted into their families," 
for nothing could be more certain, as they conceived, 
than that it would not only "have a tendency to set one 
part of Society against another," but that it did actually 
call upon one part to treat another as aliens and un- 
worthy the name of brethren: not because they had 
violated any of the principles and testimonies of the 
Society, and thus become worthy of being treated as 
heathen men and publicans ; but because they were 



60 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

endeavoring to advance them, and that, too, by means in 
accordance with the general usage of Society and the 
former advice of the Yearly Meeting. 

We have seen that eight of the members of the Meet- 
ing for Sufferings were to be removed and others 
appointed in their places. Some of these appointments 
were to take place in at least one of the Quarters where 
the Anti-Slavery feeling was strong ; hence the necessity 
of appointing a committee to visit subordinate meetings 
with the aforesaid u Epistle of Advice." Twenty-two 
Friends, men and women, were deputed to attend to this 
business. The Select Yearly Meeting also drafted an 
Epistle of very similar import to its subordinate meet- 
ings, and likewise deputed a number of Friends to carry 
it down and endeavor to enforce submission to its require- 
ments. Extracts from this Epistle will be observed in 
the course of the controversy, its insertion, therefore, I 
here omit. 



CHAPTEE VI. 

First move of the Anti-Slavery party looking toward the re- organization 
of the Society. 

Such was the condition in which the advocates of im- 
mediate and unconditional emancipation were now placed 
by the system of proscriptive measures, which the Yearly 
Meeting this year consummated. And let it be borne in 
raind that John Meader and Christopher Healy, minis- 
ters in attendance from the East, w T here the opposition to 
Abolition had been raging to a fearful height, and who 
brought a large share of it with them, had no small part 
in producing this lamentable state of affairs. 

The following extract from an editorial in the " Free 
Labor Advocate," dated Tenth mo. 15th, 1842, will give 
the reader an account of the closing scene at this Yearly 
Meeting, and of what immediately followed : 



INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 61 

" Anti-Slavery Friends being thus proscribed, and 
feeling themselves virtually cut off from all the benefits 
of religious society, found themselves in a very tried and 
painful situation. Thus circumstanced, it was perfectly 
natural and entirely reasonable that they should desire 
to confer together for the purpose of arriving at some 
conclusion, as to the proper course for them to pursue. 
With this view, a Friend arose during the last sitting of 
the Yearly Meeting, and proposed that those Friends 
who were favorable to the Anti-Slavery cause, and who 
felt aggrieved with the proceedings of the Yearly Meet- 
ing should remain in the house at the rise of the meeting, 
for the purpose of having such a conference. A con- 
siderable expression of unity with the proposition was 
made, and not one dissenting voice was heard. 

" After the conclusion of the meeting, a large com- 
pany assembled inside the house, many others having 
stepped out and not yet returned. Before any opportu- 
nity was had for conference, John Maxwell walked into 
the minister's gallery, and in the name of the trustees, 
demanded of those present, an immediate evacuation of 
the house. He first called them Friends, then, as if cor- 
recting himself, he said he did not know whether they 
were Friends or not — he would call them people. A 
Friend immediately proposed, that as they were arbitrar- 
ily forbidden the use of the house for the purpose of con- 
ferring together, those favorable to such a conference, 
meet at Newport (ten miles north,) at 9 o'clock next 
morning. The proposition was united with, and the 
people retired. 

" Next morning, notwithstanding many had from ne- 
cessity started for home, a large assembly convened at 
Newport, and continued in conference till 11 o'clock, 
when it adjourned till 2 o'clock, p. m. } to give place to 
the regular Week-day meeting. From 2 o'clock, the con- 
ference continued till near sunset. Entire harmony pre- 
vailed : the spirit of love and prayer overshadowed the 
meeting, under the influence of which, devout sup* 
plications went up to the throne of mercy and grace, for 

4 



62 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

Divine counsel and aid in this hour of sore conflict ; and 
the good presence of the Lord was sensibly felt to be 
with ns, tendering our spirits together, and renewing our 
resolutions in the strength afforded us, from the source 
of all true strength to do battle against the great Jugger- 
naut of Slavery, although in so doing, we may encounter 
the violence of mobocratic fury, the taunts and jeers of 
our fellow-citizens, and worse than all, the opposition and 
censure of our fellow-members of that Society whose 
principles we dearly love, and from whose bosom nothing 
but dire necessity can drive us. But dear as we hold the 
unity of the Church, we cannot sacrifice the Truth to 
maintain it ; and we pray for strength to remain true to 
the cause, though all men oppose it. If some of our 
opposers had been there, and heard what we heard, and 
felt what we felt, they would surely have been ashamed 
of the charge so often made against us, of working in 
our own strength. 

" It was unanimously agreed, to propose to Anti- 
Slavery Friends to be firm in the maintenance of their 
principles, and for the purpose of promoting harmony of 
action, to hold conferences in their respective locations." 

At the above meeting or conference, it was the conclu- 
sion of those present, to wait until it was known whether 
the committees to which I have alluded, from the Yearly 
Meeting and the Select body, would really carry out the 
proscriptive measures as enjoined upon them, in remov- 
ing from their stations the Anti-Slavery part of Society, 
before any further action should be taken. 

In the meantime, conferences at different places were 
held as proposed. At length Friends of Newport and 
vicinity, after witnessing the proceedings of those com- 
mittees in New Garden Quarter, became thoroughly 
satisfied that they were determined to carry out their in- 
structions to the very letter, met in convention on the 4th 
day of First mo., 1843, " for the purpose," as they say, 
" of taking into consideration the anomalous and pecu- 
liarly tried situation in which we are placed by the arbi- 
trary and proscriptive measures of a portion of the So- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 63 

ciety claiming to be ' the body,' [as] we are, on account 
of a practical adherence to our testimony against Slav- 
ery, cut off from all the beneficial privileges of member- 
ship in that religious Society whose principles we love, 
and whose testimonies are dear to our hearts ; and for 
the purpose of adopting such measures as, in the open- 
ings of Truth, may appear to be productive of unity and 
harmony in our proceedings — the promotion of the Anti- 
Slavery cause, and to secure to ourselves the privileges 
and benefits of religious Society, of which we have been 
unhappily deprived, contrary to the general usage, and 
established order and discipline of Society. 

" After mature deliberation and a free interchange of 
sentiment, the following-named Friends were appointed 
to prepare an address to Friends generally, setting forth 
in a concise manner the result of our deliberation, em- 
bracing a call for a general convention of Friends at 
some suitable time and place, for the purpose of deliber- 
ating more fully upon the propriety of re-organizing the 
Yearly Meetingof Indiana upon the true principles, and in 
accordance with the discipline and usages of the Society 
of Friends, and in unity with the practice of the Yearly 
Meetings of London and Dublin.'' 

The committee appointed in accordance with the above 
Minute, whose names tor sake of brevity are omitted, 
drew up and sent forth, the following address.' 



CHAPTER VII. 

" Address of a Conference of Friends, held at Newport, "Wayne County, 
Indiana., First month 4th, 1843 ; to the Members of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting." 

" Dear Friends : — In deliberating at this time on the 
momentous subject which has called us together, our 
minds have been solemnly impressed with the very great 



64 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

responsibility attached to the position we occupy in the 
religious Society of which we are members ; the influence 
of our conduct on the A. S. cause, and the duty which 
we owe to the community at large, as a component part 
of the fraternity of man, and especially as responsible 
members of the great slave-holding confederacy of the 
United States of America. 

" When we reflect, that in all probability the question, 
whether Slavery in this country, ' shall be abolished by 
peaceful legislation, or in the midst of bloodshed and 
violence,' depends mainly, under Providence, on the suc- 
cess of the great A. S. enterprise now in progress ; as 
friends to the peace and happiness of our country, as 
well as the deliverance of millions of our fellow-beings 
from the unutterable horrors of ignominious bondage, 
we cannot but be alarmed at the persevering and in- 
creased opposition to the progress of the work, mani- 
fested in various ways, and under various pretenses, by 
the leading influences both in Church and State. In a 
particular manner, we deplore the opposition of the 
Church of Christ, so called, as presenting a greater ob- 
stacle to the peaceable termination of Slavery, than all 
other causes combined. And among the proscriptive 
measures of the various religious societies in our country, 
made use of for the purpose of preventing their members 
from active labors in the A. S. cause, none that we know 
of, have resorted to such a decided course of opposition 
as Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends ; and on account 
of the Anti-Slavery character of the Society established 
by the labors of our fathers, none, we believe, exert so 
powerful an influence to the disparagement of the work, 
to the lessening the probability of its acceptance by the 
nation, and of the peaceable accomplishment of the great 
work of emancipation, and consequently to increase in 
the same proportion the probability of a bloody termina- 
tion of the evil. 

With these views of the subject, it becomes us to in- 
quire with deep concern what is required at our hands 
in regard to this great question, and to be very careful 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 65 

that we do not, for the sake of c retaining place and in- 
fluence,' make a compromise with the opposition, and 
add the weight of our influence to that enormous load of 
guilt, which, like a millstone, is sinking Church and 
State into the vortex of ruin. 

M In view of the proscriptive measures put in opera- 
tion by our opposers, it becomes our duty to inquire 
what is required of us in order to secure the benefits of 
religious society. 

M "Without discipline, and contrary to the plain provi- 
sions thereof, eight members of the Meeting for Suffer- 
ings were reported disqualified, and four of them re- 
moved; the other four having been appointed by Quarterly 
meetings, are to be removed by them from their stations, 
without preferring any charge against them, or giving 
them any opportunity to answer for themselves, merely 
(as is well understood from the circumstances,) for bear- 
ing a faithful testimony against Slavery, in accordance 
with the practice of Friends generally of former years, 
and with the recent earnest recommendation of London 
Yearly Meeting, and the continued practice of our 
brethren in England. For our Anti-Slavery principles 
and practices, measures have been set on foot, and are 
being carried out in practice, to exclude us from partici- 
pating in the affairs of Society; to remove Clerks, Over- 
seers, members of committees, and Ministers and Elders 
from their stations, and to place us before the public 
under the character of offenders, lying under the censure 
of the Church. 

u Being thus virtually cast out of the Society, so far as 
regards its benefits ; it seems to us that our situation is 
very precarious ; that in this position we are in danger, 
either of losing respect for religious society, or of com- 
promising our principles, in order to produce a reconcili- 
ation with ; the body,' which is thus using all its influ- 
ence to prevent the active exercise of our Anti-Slavery 
principles. 

"Another consideration of importance is, that in our 
present situation our influence, as members of religious 



66 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

society, is lost to the Society of which we are members 
and to the community at large. It cannot be expected 
that, censured and proscribed as we are, our testimony 
will be received by our opposers to the reformation of 
the Society, or that the people generally will be likely to 
pay that respect to our Anti-Slavery labors, which they 
might do under different circumstances. 

" Under these views, and in accordance with the 
designs of the conference above-mentioned, we propose 
that a General Convention of members of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting be held at Newport, Wayne Co., la., on Second- 
day, the 6th of Second month, 1843, for the purpose set 
forth in the foregoing Minutes of our appointment. 

" We hope that Friends, those in a particular manner 
who are favorable to the Anti-Slavery cause will feel 
bound to attend, if practicable, in order to aid by their 
counsels in coming to a correct decision on the momen- 
tous subject under consideration." 



CHAPTER VIII. 

Remarks on the subject of the Call by the Editor of the Free-Labor 
Advocate — Letter and declaration of Charles Osborne. 

The object of the above call was justly deemed one of 
incalculable importance ; and with feelings, no doubt, of 
this kind the editors of the Free-Labor Advocate at that 
time published the following additional, short, impres- 
sive, and very appropriate invitation in that paper : 

"friends' convention. 

" We hope the Anti-Slavery Friends will not neglect 
to attend the Convention to be at this place on the 6th of 
next month. It is certainly an important concern ; and 
those Friends who are not in favor of the measure pro- 
posed for consideration, should be sure to attend and 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 67 

state their objections, that nothing may be done unad- 
visedly. It may be that the attendance of such will be 
a means of preventing an improper movement. Now is 
the time to make objections before any decisive steps are 
taken. If some of our friends believe we are about to 
pursue an improper course, it is certainly their duty to 
endeavor to show us our error before the final step is 
taken. Come, let us reason together.' 5 

The above exhibits the spirit that prevailed in the 
Anti-Slavery party throughout the whole struggle; that 
is, a manifest desire for a fair, full, candid, and impartial 
examination, without infringing on the rights and privi- 
leges of any. They would gladly have met their strong- 
est opposers, and listened to every argument they could 
produce against their own principles and measures, or 
any course they thought right to pursue ; but a directly 
opposite course was a prominent feature in the proceed- 
ings of the opposite party, both as regarded meetings 
and individuals. 

Charles Osborne, who, as I have already intimated, was 
one of the most conspicuous of the Anti-Slavery party, 
and one which, as the present work discloses, was re- 
moved from the Meeting for Sufferings for his faithful- 
ness to the Anti-Slavery cause, after witnessing to his 
great sorrow the course of the Yearly Meeting, thought 
it his duty to publish a declaration of his principles rela- 
tive to Slavery, which, considering the position he so 
long occupied in the Society of Friends as an approved 
and highly esteemed Minister, I deem proper to insert at 
large. It was written, as will appear ironi the date of 
the accompanying letter to the editors of the Advocate 
(which I will also lay before the reader), previous to the 
meeting of the General Convention of Friends, and will, 
therefore, as regards the order of time, more properly 
come in here. 

" Young's Prairie, Cass Cocxty, Michigan, 

Twelfth Month 31, 1842. 

" H. H. Fay and B. Stanton: 

"Dear Friends : — 1 forward, for publication, my princi- 
ples relative to Slavery, with the cause why I have been 



68 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

removed from the Meeting for Sufferings. Also a notice 
to the Indiana State Anti-Slavery Society, showing that 
I accept the appointment to the World's Convention; 
that all may see that I am still willing to serve the cause 
of universal emancipation as far as circumstances and 
my humble abilities will enable me to do. Short of this, 
I cannot conceive how I could stand clear of the sin of 
oppression in the Divine sight. 

" The present is a time of deep trial to the friends of 
this most righteous cause ; especially in our land. Most 
of our rulers, both in Church and State, are to be found 
uniting in, and helping to keep up, the popular outcry 
against Abolition ; some openly and undisguised, others 
put on much sanctimony, and profess to be Abolitionists 
and real friends of the slave, yet by their acts clearly 
demonstrate that they cherish more than a common 
'lively inter est for the oppressor? The influence of the 
latter class, I conceive to be far more deadly and better 
calculated to support the system of American Slavery 
than the former. Had it not been for such religious 
Abolitionists as these, w 7 ho love the praise of man more 
than the praise of God, Slavery would long since have 
been banished from our boasted land of liberty, if not 
from the world. It is to this class of Abolition-Coloniza- 
tionists — deplorers and suppoiters of Slavery — that we 
have to ascribe our unprecedented trials in the Society 
we love, the religious principles of which we have con- 
scientiously received to hold and carry out in practice. 
It being for this we are deemed disqualified members, 
not fit to participate in transacting the affairs of Society, 
it cannot be otherwise than a close and deep trial to the 
friends of the slave. We willingly acknowledge it is to 
us the greatest we ever met with in Society. For plead- 
ing the cause of the oppressed, we ourselves are put in 
bonds. We mourn for the state of our religious 
Society — we lament because our chain and the chain of 
our brethren in slavery are made heavy — because of the 
attempts and exertions of our brethren to add afflic- 
tions to our bonds! We remember those that are 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 69 

in bonds as bound with them, and mourn because of the 
oppressor. 

" Where then is our consolation? I answer, in the 
God of the oppressed — the friend of the poor and needy. 
He saith, ' Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be 
comforted.' fie further said to his faithful followers, 
c Ye shall be hated of all nations for my sake.' i Marvel 
not if the world hate you, ye know that it hated me 
before it hated you.' Yes, my friends, this is our joy — - 
our consolation, that we are so far like our divine Master, 
despised and rejected of men, and not esteemed. If we 
are persecuted, and not only bound, but put out of the 
pale of society, we still have the consolatory evidence of 
his Holy Spirit, with his promise, 'Be thou faithful unto 
death and I will give thee a crown of life,' to cheer and 
animate us, as well as to strengthen us in the belief that 
the cause we have espoused and for which we suffer, is a 
righteous one. Indeed for my own part, when I reflect 
on the opposition and consequent treatment which I have 
met with from my brethren in society because of my 
Anti-Slavery principles and an unwillingness to denounce 
Abolitionists, I feel inclined to respond to the language 
of the Apostle Paul on the subject of the resurrection: 
'If in this life only we have hope, we are of all men most 
miserable.' 

"And now, dear friends, I fervently desire that all who 
are like our divine Master in sufferings, may also be like 
him in spirit, in firmness, and prayer. ' Father, forgive 
them, they know not what they do.' 

"It is a lamentable fact, that among all the professed 
Christian churches in the United States, there are none 
to be found that are not in some way or other contribut- 
ing to the support of Slavery. And who cannot see that 
such a Christianity has a strong tendency to prevent the 
advancement of righteousness on the earth, to cause the 
heathen nations to be slow in receiving the truths of the 
Gospel, and make infidels of many who have in degree 
received a Christian education ? It would be a credit to 
the Christian name were there even one society bearing 



70 : HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

a faithful testimony against Slavery. And we must be 
slow indeed if we do not perceive that on us it now de- 
volves to say, whether there shall any longer be a Society 
of Anti-Slavery Friends in this land or not. Let all our 
Friends who are virtually cut off from the communion 
and fellowship of Society for their conscientious endea- 
vors to carry out their testimony against Slavery, by 
abstaining from slave-labor and refusing to vote for pro- 
slavery candidates, still bear in mind that they are acting 
in strict accordance with the spirit of the Discipline and 
with the Gospel of Christ, and that they ought not to be 
terrified and driven back because of church censure, nor 
because of the cry raised against them of ' wild fanati- 
cism,' 'disorganize^, 5 'giving their strength to the Abo- 
litionists,' etc. For it is plain that religious duty calls 
us to speak out and let all know that we do intend, 
through Divine assistance, to bear a consistent testimony 
against the sin of Slavery, as far as may be in our 
power. For what good, we ask, will our testimony do 
against any evil, while we continue to give it that support 
without which it could not exist ? 

u With a salutation of love to you and all our Anti- 
Slavery friends in your parts, I remain your friend, 

u Charles Osborne." 

A DECLARATION. 

"Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write 
grievousness which they have prescribed, to turn aside the needy from 
judgment, and to take away the rightf rom the poor of my people, that 
widows may be their prey, and that they may rob the fatherless." — 
Isa. x, 1, 2. 

"to all to whom this may come. 

" Grace be unto you, and peace from Him who came 
'to preach deliverance to the captives,' and 'to set at 
liberty them that are bruised.' 

" I have found it to be my indispensable duty to de- 
clare to the world my belief of the repugnancy of Slavery 
to the Christian religion. It, therefore, remains to be 
my continued concern to bear testimony against holding 
our fellow-men in bondage. And at the present time, I 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 71 

apprehend it to be incumbent on each individual to 
deeply consider his own particular share in this testi- 
mony. The slow progress in the emancipation of the 
slaves, I lament; nevertheless, I do not despair of their 
ultimate enlargement. 

"And I desire that the friends of humanity every- 
where may not suffer the deplorable condition of our 
enslaved fellow-beings, to lose its force upon their minds 
through the delay which the opposition of interested 
men may occasion in this work of justice and mercy; 
but rather be animated to consider that the longer the 
opposition remains, the greater is the necessity on the 
side of righteousness and benevolence for their steady 
perseverance in pleading their cause. 

"Amidst my sympathies for the sufferers, I do not forget 
to cultivate those sensations which direct the mind in 
pity toward the deplorable state of those men, whether 
in foreign countries or our own, who promote, procure, 
and execute the tearing away of the Africans from their 
native land, as well as those who detain them in slavery, 
remembering that they are men equally interested with 
myself in the rewards of futurity. 

" Believing, therefore, as I do, that a just and dread- 
ful retribution awaits the unrepenting and obdurate op- 
pressor, at that awful tribunal where sophistry will not 
prevail to exculpate, I seek for, and cherish that dispo- 
sition of mind, which can pray for these enemies of hu- 
manity, and fervently breathe for their restoration to 
soundness of judgment and purity of principle. 

" 1 believe, also, that a proper regard to this testimony 
would lead all the friends of humanity to conscientiously 
avoid becoming accessory to any step whereby Slavery 
may be strengthened or prolonged, and consequently, to 
throw their influence in favor of immediate and uncon- 
ditional emancipation. 

u The Gospel and Slavery are as utterly irreconcilable, 
and as much opposed to each other, as Christ and Belial, 
light and darkness. I, therefore, do believe, that it is 



72 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

the imperative duty of every one that nameth the name 
of Christ, to depart from this great iniquity. 

" As relates to Colonization, I believe the American 
Colonization Society is iniquitous ; because it traduces 
the free people of color, sanctions and strengthens exist- 
ing prejudice against them, discourages and opposes their 
elevation in this country, and countenances oppression, 
to induce them to leave their native land in quest of some 
more hospitable region, and, at the same time, proposes 
to secure the master in the possession of his Tinman pro- 
perty ; thus it tends to fortify and prolong Slavery. 

a And now for the clearing of Truth ; I believe it to be 
a duty that devolves on me thus publicly to state and 
make known that, for a conscientious adherence to the 
foregoing principles, I have been deemed a disqualified 
member, and removed from the Meeting for Sufferings, 
by the leading influences of the late Indiana Yearly Meet- 
ing of Friends. And at the time when this business was 
before the meeting, I made a solemn appeal to them to 
have the cause of disqualification inserted in the Minutes, 
that wherever they might reach, the cause might appear 
also. But this request, however just and reasonable, 
was, after considerable discussion, denied me, contrary to 
the minds of many Friends. 

"How is the gold become dim! how is the most fine 
gold changed ! Lam. iv, 1. 

" In the love of the truth, as it is in Jesus, remember- 
ing those that are in bonds as bound with them, I rest 
and remain as ever, a friend to religious liberty. 

" Charles Osborne. 

« Twelfth mo., 1842." 

It will be observed by the reader, familiar with the dis- 
cipline of Indiana Yearly Meeting, that the writer of 
the above took a considerable portion of it from that book, 
from the Society's standing declaration relative to Slavery, 
and the duty of members in regard to it, and made it his 
own. In doing this, he appears to have had two objects 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 73 

in view: first, to declare his own views and sentiments ; 
and, secondly, to show that he was engaged in canning 
out the very principles the Society adopted in former 
days ; and that for doing this he was then under censure, 
and that the scale had so changed that the "opposition of 
interested men," which the framers of the Discipline en- 
deavored to fortify the members of Society against, had 
been signally arrayed against himself by members, and 
those, too, who were leaders in the Society. 



CHAPTER IX. 

Proceedings of the Convention to consider the subject of Re-Organizing 
the Society — Its Declaration. 

At the time and place proposed for the Convention 
which had been called, a considerable number of Friends 
assembled. The vast importance of the subject for the 
decision of which they had convened, seemed to spread 
a deep and solemn feeling over the congregation — a feel- 
ing clearly depicted in the countenances of the assembly. 

After a very thorough investigation, which lasted the 
greater part of two days, and in which every side of the 
picture passed in review, the meeting came to the con- 
clusion, as set forth in the following Minute: 

u In consequence of the departure of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting of Friends from the true and genuine principles 
of the Society, in regard to our testimony against Slavery, 
and because of its arbitrary, proscriptive, and unchristian 
measures, a meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends, convened 
at Newport, Wayne county, Indiana, and, after giving 
the subject a serious and deliberate examination, it was 
the unanimous conclusion that the circumstances under 
which we are now placed, render it indispensably neces- 
sary to separate ourselves therefrom. We, therefore, 
now, the Seventh day of Second month, 1843, associate 
ourselves together as a religious society, in the capacity 



74 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

of a Yearly Meeting, tinder the title of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends, embracing in its limits 
all those members of the Indiana Yearly Meeting, who ad- 
here to the genuine principles of the Society, residing in 
the district described in the Discipline of the Yearly Meet- 
ing from which we now separate ourselves. ' ; 

The meeting, then, entered into measures for a thorough 
organization, or rather re-organization of the Society of 
Friends. It issued various documents, including an 
Epistle to each of the Yearly Meetings, excepting, of 
course, that of Indiana ; and, after transacting a large 
amount of business, all in much brotherly love, and in 
the blessed unity of the Spirit, (a desideratum with 
many Friends for years previous, without the possibility 
of its realization,) the meeting closed, with the conclusion 
to meet again on the first Second-day of the Ninth month 
of the same j 7 ear. 

Among the documents issued, the most important is a 
Declaration, setting forth the facts, which, in the opinion 
of the meeting, rendered it obligatory upon those who 
composed it, to take the steps they did. Here it is: 

DECLARATION. 

u We feel ourselves called upon, by the circumstances 
in which we are placed, in justice to ourselves, to the 
Society of Friends throughout the world, to the cause of 
truth and righteousness in the earth, and by a just regard 
to the feelings of the community at large, to make a pub- 
lic declaration of the causes by which we have been driven 
into our present position. It is reasonable to expect that 
the public should be desirous of information on this sub- 
ject ; and we believe it right that we should make them 
acquainted with the circumstances which have reduced 
us to the necessity of separating from those with whom 
we have formerly been in connection, and to organize 
ourselves into a Society of Friends, upon the true princi- 
ples of that Society, in w T hich we may enjoy those reli- 
gious privileges and benefits which we highly prize, and 
of which we have been arbitrarily and unhappily deprived 



INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING- OF FRIENDS, 75 

by the proscriptive measures of the ruling part of the 
Yearly Meeting. 

u Before we proceed to the statement of the causes of 
separation, it will be proper to declare that we have not 
separated from the principles of the Society, nor from its 
testimonies and discipline, but from that body of mem- 
bers who have departed from our testimony against Sla- 
very, and from a due respect to the Discipline. We wish 
it distinctly understood that we have adopted no new 
doctrine, nor any new system of church government ; 
that we claim to be, in the strictest sense of the word, a 
Society of Friends, with no other nominal distinction in 
the title which we have adopted, than that which is ne- 
cessary to distinguish us from those from whom we have 
separated, and to express our adherence to our well known 
testimony against Slavery. 

u Although it is a humiliating consideration, yet by a 
reference to the history of the past, we find that there 
is a universal liability in all associations, both civil and 
religious, to deterioration and corruption. Even the first 
Christian church organization, the purest the world ever 
witnessed, departing little by little from the Truth as it is 
in Jesus, finally arrived at such a state of depravity, as 
to advocate or connive at all kinds of wickedness — at the 
very works of the devil himself, which the great Author 
of the religion it professed, came into the world to de- 
stroy. 

"By yielding to the convictions of Truth upon their 
"understandings, the primitive Friends were not only ena- 
bled to discover many of the corruptions which had grad- 
ually found their way into Christendom, but were, also, 
induced to bear a faithful testimony against them. They 
separated themselves from those religious communities 
with which they were formerly connected, and in order 
that they might have an opportunity to strengthen and 
encourage one another in the support of their religious 
principles and testimonies, they formed themselves into a 
distinct religious society. 

" And although they seem to have taken the greatest 



76 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

precaution in order to prevent a recurrence of similar cor- 
ruptions and abuses in the Church, as appears by their 
various lucid declarations of sentiment, their powerful 
reasoning in support of their principles and doctrines, and 
their forcible and scriptural definition of the power and 
authority of the Church, as well as the duty and obliga- 
tion resting upon its individual members, relative thereto, 
showing that without the aid and assistance of the power 
and spirit of God leading thereto, no decision or decree of 
the Church is available, and that " it is the duty of each 
individual member to assent to the judgment of Truth, 
whether pronounced by few or many, independent of 
any ivorldly or selfish consideration." Yet facts and cir- 
cumstances connected with the Society in this country 
at the present time, sorrowfully demonstrate the ineffi- 
ciency of all this, good as it is in itself, without a frequent 
and effectual recurrence to first principles, without that 
deep and heartfelt concern to ascertain the Truth, and to 
perform that which duty requires at our hands, which is 
the only conservative exercise calculated to prevent the 
influx of that natural depravity, as we before observed, to 
which all such institutions are liable. 

" As the Society of Friends was first gathered, and 
that most emphatically under the influence of this concern 
and exercise, so by the descending of the same mantle 
upon their successors, it was enabled to see the entire 
sinfulness of various practices, which in its infancy, 
escaped attention ; such as buying, selling, and holding 
slaves, the use of intoxicating drinks, etc. ; and so long 
as it as a body continued in this situation, there was a 
gradual approximation to perfection in its testimonies. 
Through the unremitted labors of Woolman, Benezet, and 
kindred spirits, Friends of the Yearly Meeting of Phila- 
delphia cleared themselves from holding slaves, from 
whence the concern spread to the other Yearly Meetings 
on the continent with the same happy result. About 
this time, James Pemberton, Warner Mifflin, and many 
other Friends, eminent for their piety and virtue, appre- 
hending that much advantage to the cause of the op- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 77 

pressed Africans might be derived from duly enlisting all 
classes of the community in their behalf, engaged in the 
formation of associations for that purpose, within the 
limits of several of the Yearly Meetings, and the most 
gratifying consequences were the result. Under the in- 
fluence of these societies, feelings of friendship and com- 
miseration for this oppressed and deeply injured people 
increased and spread through the country, until public 
sentiment became so changed as to abolish slavery by 
law in seven of the original states of this confederacy. 
But after much good had been effected, through the 
agency of these institutions, a combination of adverse 
circumstances conspired to change the current of feeling. 
The hand of cruel avarice became afresh nerved to its 
unholy grasp by the prospect of extensive gain, through 
the facilities offered by the invention of the cotton gin. 
This prospect and desire of gain was not confined to 
those immediately engaged in holding slaves, but ex- 
tended with lamentable effect to many of those in the 
Free states inclined to enter into mercantile or manufac- 
turing operations. This class included a number of the 
most wealthy and influential in the Society of Friends, 
in the middle and eastern states, and the natural and 
consequent intercourse between them and the slave- 
holders of the south, had a direct tendency to leaven 
them into the same lordly, pompous, and intolerant feel- 
ing.* This circumstance, taken in connection with that 



* We believe it has been owing to a considerable extent to the influ- 
ence and agency of this class in the east, that the opponents of the 
Anti- Slavery cause at present among us, have succeeded in so com- 
pletely changing the character of the proceedings of our Yearly Meet- 
ing. It has also been through their representations, or rather misrepre- 
sentations, that some of our Trans-Atlantic brethren have been induced 
to join them in opposition to us. They have persuaded them that a 
difference of circumstances exist between England and America, and 
such as to render it altogether improper to engage in an enterprise in 
the latter, which it would be right to approve and promote in the 
former. 

This difference, however, although repeatedly asked for, and recently, 
attempted to be given, has never been exhibited to us. On the contrary, 
their objections to Friends joining with others, are such as all must 

4* 



78 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

of the formation and active operation of the Colonization 
Society, instituted mainly by slave-holders, and purposely 
for the removal of the ' free people of color ' from the 
country, and in order that none of the despised class 
might enjoy liberty among us, almost sealed the fate of 
genuine Anti-Slavery feeling in the Society. Those asso- 
ciations, instituted for the purpose of creating this feeling, 
were suffered to go down, and the energies and resources 
of the people prostituted to that of sending out of the 
country, those who already enjoyed personal freedom, 
instead of their being applied to the alleviation of the 
distresses of the bondman. In short, the cold hand of 
apathy, and the still more withering influence of an in- 
veterate prejudice, spread almost a universal gloom around 
the cause of African freedom. There were still, however, 
those in different parts of the country who bore a decided 
testimony against the spirit of the times. In 1832, a 
resuscitation of the Anti-Slavery cause commenced in one 
of the eastern states. 

" But the appearance of animation being but small at 
first, but little apprehension of its becoming an efficient 
organization was entertained by many of its enemies 
until some time afterward. And although no Anti- 
Slavery society existed within the limits of this Yearly 
Meeting until several years subsequent to the above date, 
yet there were a number of those among us who bore 
testimony against the spirit to which we have referred. 
This number, holding an influence to some extent in the 
Society, the Yearly Meeting in 1836, issued the following 
Advice relative to the subject under consideration : 

" ; We feel ourselves called upon at the present time, 
affectionately and tenderly, to caution all our dear friends 
to take no part in, nor render any aid to, any political as- 
sociation on the subject of African Slavery, which is, or 
may be, founded on principles either directly or in- 
directly having a tendency to promote the unrighteous 

see,urjon moderate reflection, are equally applicable to the Society on 
both sides of the Atlantic. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 79 

work of expatriation ; it being our settled conviction that 
this work, as a condition to the slaves being liberated, is 
unjust and oppressive. 5 Advices similar to this, were 
issued at different successive periods, and much care 
taken to speak in an encouraging manner, in regard to 
those engaged in the present Anti-Slavery enterprise ; 
' and Friends affectionately advised to be so alive to our 
testimony against Slavery, as, neither through prejudice 
or otherwise, to cast any discouragement in the way of 
those who are faithfully laboring to promote universal 
emancipation, whether such laborers be found within or 
without the pale of Society,' but to ; endeavor to spread 
the concern, and enlighten the minds of the people, by 
giving circulation to such publications as are calculated 
to advance the cause of immediate emancipation on 
Christian principles.' 

" ' And a concern has been felt to arise, that Friends 
generally, may be stirred up to renewed diligence, in 
faithfully maintaining our testimony against Slavery, 
not shrinking therefrom on account of opposition, or the 
fear of persecution ; but that we may individually be 
willing in true simplicity, to inquire whether there is not 
something for us to do for this suffering portion of our 
fellow-creatures. We do not wish any to engage in ac- 
tive measures on any other ground than a sense of duty, 
and in accordance with our well-known principles, yet 
we would encourage all to a close examination as to what 
is required at their hands, and how they may employ 
the talents committed to them for noble purposes, in the ad- 
vancement of the blessed work of universal emancipation, 
by meekly, yet boldly, either publicly or privately, plead- 
ing the cause of the oppressed.' At the same time, however, 
some recommendations to consider whether the time had 
not come in which it would be most safe for members of 
our religious Society to abstain from mixing with others 
in benevolent associations, etc., were contained in the 
Minutes of the meeting ; and were no doubt the senti- 
ments of some who were the real friends of immediate 
emancipation, and weightily considered by others of this 



80 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

class, who like Pemberton and his worthy coadjutors in 
the cause, had joined with others in the formation of 
Anti-Slavery societies. But as they had become con- 
vinced of the necessity of ' endeavoring to spread the 
concern, and enlighten the minds of the people,' and as 
they could not discover any plan which w r ould so effectu- 
ally facilitate the accomplishment of this desirable object, 
they could not for conscience' sake, abandon those socie- 
ties which they had been instrumental in gathering ; the 
good effects of which, had now become obvious, and thus 
cause the interest which had been excited in behalf of 
their suffering brethren and sisters in bonds, to languish 
or totally disappear ; and seeing the work in which they 
were engaged, was so highly spoken of by the meeting, 
and that the advice on this head, was given on account of 
a fear that some of our principles might be compromised, 
and not in consequence of the actual existence of any- 
thing of the kind ; they therefore continued actively en- 
gaged as before, confidently believing that preservation 
would be experienced in the performance of so necessary 
a work, although it might render them at times some- 
what more exposed. 

u Here, it is worthy of remark, that ever since the issu- 
ing of the advices repudiating the Colonization scheme, 
there were some of our prominent members open advo- 
cates of that institution, who appeared to have been fired 
with indignation at the expression of such sentiments, 
evidently entertaining a settled purpose to prostrate the 
Anti-Slavery cause and its advocates in the Society, if 
ever a favorable opportunity should present. And now 
as this cause progressed, the main body of its enemies 
who had heretofore entertained but little apprehension of 
its success, and who had remained apparently in almost 
a state of indifference in regard to the subject, through 
the alarm taken and communicated by those of kindred 
spirits in the east, and by discovering the project so 
gratifying to their prejudices (the Colonization scheme,) 
to sink in public estimation, in consequence of the Anti- 
Slavery movement, together through the instrumentality 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 81 

of the individuals above referred to, suddenly became 
aroused to action, and inspired with a determination to 
arrest its onward course. Hence, no time was lost at this 
favorable moment, in taking occasion from the circum- 
stances in which we were placed by the Advices referred 
to, to cry out c insubordination,' 4 want of proper subor- 
dination to the authority of the church,' etc. Advice in 
regard to joining with others, from year to year grew 
more and more positive, gradually, however, becoming 
divested of the mask under which it was at first covered, 
and approximating as time advanced, and as the Anti- 
Slavery cause prospered, to the full development of that 
Pro-Slavery spirit which has so sorrowfully found its way 
into the bosom of Society, and which the following exhi- 
bition of facts and circumstances will serve more fully to 
illustrate. 

" It should be recollected, that the advice of which we 
have been speaking, was originally intended by the 
friends of the Anti-Slavery cause, to refer to all benevo- 
lent societies without distinction. In 1840, in the renewal 
of the Advice, it was applied to two only, ' Abolition and 
Colonization Societies;' the latter of which, as before 
brought to view, had been specially condemned as being 
unjust and oppressive in its nature and tendencies, and 
hence it was artfully chained to the former, in order, 
if possible, to sink its character at least to an equal 
depth, without an open manifestation of special hostility 
thereto. 

u In 1811, the opposition becoming more emboldened, 
it was again repeated, and confined to A. S. Societies 
altogether ; and even the use of our meeting-houses was 
refused to such societies for their accommodation in the 
transaction of their business. 

" At our last Yearly Meeting, in addition to this, not 
only those who had joined in these associations, but also 
such as had not, but yet could not for conscience' sake 
denounce others therefor, were by special act of the 
Meeting, deprived of any privilege in regard to the 
transaction of any of its important business, and subor- 



82 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

dinate meetings were advised to pursue the same course 
of conduct down to the most remote and inferior branches ; 
and that ostensibly on account of their being opposed to 
the advice and travail of the body ; while at the same 
time, some who were the most forward in endeavoring to 
enforce submission to this advice, were of those who 
were actively engaged in mixed associations of a differ- 
ent character, and in supporting, both directly and in- 
directly, the Colonization scheme, which, as we have 
already shown, the Yearly Meeting not only advised 
against, but declared to be unjust and oppressive. In 
addition to this, it is notorious that many of the same class 
have for several years past, stood in open opposition to 
the Advices of the Meeting, on other important subjects. 

" It may be proper here to state, that in order to avoid 
going contrary to the advice of the meeting by mixing 
with others, and at the same time, be engaged in spread- 
ing the concern, etc., agreeably to the requisition of the 
body, several associations were formed in different parts, 
composed of Friends only, for that purpose. But to our 
astonishment, as soon as we had taken this course, lead- 
ing members of Society, active opponents to mixed as- 
sociations, declared this to be more objectionable than 
the other. It was said that in Society, in Meetings for 
Discipline, were the places to labor in this cause. 

u This, we readily admit to be correct, so far as relates 
to a reformation in Society only. But recently, when 
this has been attended to, and the state of Society repre- 
sented to the Yearly Meeting, although bound by disci- 
pline, and all previous usage, as well as the very nature 
and design of the regulation, to notice the deficiencies 
reported, laboring for their removal, and to form the 
summary answers to the queries of the materials received 
from the Quarters, and notwithstanding several of these 
reported considerable deficiency in regard to our testi- 
mony against Slavery, yet the meeting independently, 
and without any regard thereto, most extraordinarily 
said, that ' Friends bear a testimony against Slavery as 
far as appears? 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 83 

"According to our Discipline relative to this subject, 
which had its origin under the influence of that feeling 
which instituted the first Anti-Slavery organization, not 
only were members prohibited from holding or hiring 
slaves, and advised to avoid becoming executors or ad- 
ministrators to estates where slaves are bequeathed, but 
also recommended not to be accessory to any step whereby 
their bondage might be prolonged. Thus evidently 
opening a door for, and inviting the exercise of a tender 
conscience in regard to any course of conduct whatever, 
which we might become convinced would have this effect. 
The African committee, it is known, were appointed to 
have the care of the concerns of the people of color 
among us, on account of the disabilities under which 
they labor, and their liability to be kidnapped and carried 
into slavery. 

u Being aware, upon reflection, that the consumption of 
the proceeds of slavery was the very thing which had 
reduced this people to a situation, demanding the ap- 
pointment of such a committee, many Friends, members 
of this committee, deemed it important, in order to carry 
out its object, as well as the spirit and design of the 
Discipline above cited, that Friends should endeavor to 
avoid the use of such articles. Accordingly, one branch 
of the committee forwarded a report to its general meet- 
ing, treating the subject at some length, showing the 
impropriety and inconsistency of Friends sustaining a 
market for such productions. But when it was read in 
that body, it was spurned, it was rejected with manifest 
bitterness and contempt, and the subject prohibited being 
introduced again into the committee upon the allegation 
that it was foreign to its object. Supposing that the 
subject demanded a serious examination, at least, in 
some departments of Society, one of the Quarterly meet- 
ings, in its reports, forwarded a proposition or request to 
our last Yearly Meeting, to take into consideration, 
whether the use of such products was not a support to 
Slavery and the Slave Trade, and whether they were not 
essentially prize goods: but when it came before that 



84 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

body, it refused to take any action whatever upon the 
subject. 

u Near the commencement of our last Yearly Meeting, 
a rule was adopted, that no person who stood in oppo- 
sition to the advice and travail of the body, should be 
appointed on any important business in the meeting; 
but it was evidently intended to be applied exclusively 
to those favorable to the Anti-Slavery enterprise; for the 
next day w T hen an important committee was to be 
appointed, a Friend was named who had recently con- 
tributed in a pecuniary point of view to the support of 
the Colonization Society, which being known to some of 
our Friends, the circumstance was referred to in a man- 
ner showing the inconsistency of confirming such a 
nomination with the rule adopted, seeing his conduct 
was not only altogether contrary to the advice of a for- 
mer meeting, but also, unlike that of Anti-Slavery 
Friends, of such a character as to encourage that which 
had been declared thereby to be ' unjust and oppressive.' 
But the nomination was promptly sustained by those 
who still retain their place and influence — they wished 
the Friend to serve the meeting as proposed. It was 
then publicly observed, that if, with the information 
received, the meeting should persevere in the course it 
seemed to be taking, it must be taken for granted that its 
former advice against aiding the Colonization scheme was 
now rescinded ; to all of which the meeting deigned not to 
reply, but immediately progressed onward with its business. 

" Henry Clay, the great champion of the Pro-Slavery 
Whig party, and intended candidate for the ensuing 
Presidency of the United States — the President of the 
American Colonization Society — the slave-holder and 
duelist, while on an electioneering tour to the State of 
Indiana, attended a political meeting at Richmond, in 
the time of Yearly Meeting, word being given out 
that it was his intention to attend the public meeting of 
Friends on First-day. His meeting was held on the day 
immediately preceding this, at which time a petition was 
presented to him, with near two thousand signatures 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 85 

appended, requesting him to give liberty to those of his 
fellow-beings whom he had long deprived of their just 
and inalienable rights. In the course of his reply to 
this request, he said: ; I own about fifty slaves. I con- 
sider them as my property. We have an idea that 
whatever the law secures as property, is property.' He 
owned that Slavery was an evil, but, said he, ' the slaves 
must be prepared for freedom before they can receive 
that great boon; they must have moral cultivation. The 
Society of Friends take the right stand in relation to 
this subject,' etc. After this, a few Friends in behalf of 
those who desired to ' retain their place and influence,' 
took an opportunity to inform him that 'the Society had 
no hand in getting up this petition — they had no unity 
with its presentation — it was the work of a few Aboli- 
tionists,' or words to this effect. The Clerk of the meet- 
ing, on First-day morning, took him in his carriage 
to meeting, Friends taking care to seat him in one of the 
most conspicuous places in the house. After the close 
of the meeting, men and women, Ministers and Elders 
gathered around him in the Ministers' gallery, giving 
the strongest evidence by their introductions and saluta- 
tions, of the high estimation in which they held him ; he 
in return taking care to return the compliment with all 
the etiquette for which he is famed. 

" In order properly to estimate the whole of this trans- 
action it should be remembered, that Henry Clay was 
only a private man. True, he was an office-seeker, but 
not an office-holder. We were under no obligation to 
him as a ruler. Impartial justice, therefore, would have 
required just such treatment toward him, w T hen coming 
into our assemblies as we would mete out to the ; poor 
man in vile raiment' with the same grade of moral char- 
acter, otherwise ' we are partial in ourselves and become 
judges of evil thoughts, and are convinced of the law as 
transgressors.' Now see the contrast. 

At the time of Yearly Meeting in 1841, Charles C. 
Burleigh, an eminent philanthropist from the East, came 
to Richmond on a mission to plead the cause of equal 

5 



86 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION Itf 

and impartial justice — to plead the cause of millions of 
our innocent suffering brethren and sisters in bonds, who 
are not permitted to plead for themselves. But this man 
was treated with indignity — with utter contempt. He 
wished to hold meetings in and about Richmond. 
Friends closed their meeting-house doors against him, 
the doors of the public houses in town were closed also, 
and he was mobbed in the open street while addressing 
the people. He is a man of irreproachable character. 

Thus it is evident, so far as an extensive tissue offacts 
and circumstances can establish, and so far as the fruit 
of a tree can manifest its character, that the influence by 
which the Yearly Meeting is now governed is Pro- 
Slavery, and that unsoundness lies at the bottom of the 
opposition with which we have been assailed. Various, 
however, are the grounds of this opposition with diffe- 
rent individuals, and much too complicated to be fully 
described in our limits. But that which we doubt not is 
occupied by the greater number, is plainly alluded to in 
the following extract from the Epistle of Advice of 1841: 
'Thus maintaining our peaceable and Christian principles 
in nnbroken harmony, we shall, we believe, be enabled, 
as way opens, more availingly to plead the cause of this 
much-injured race of our fellow-men, and retain the 
place and influence which, as a Society ', we have hereto- 
fore had with the rulers of the land? 

"The rulers of our land being such as have been 
chosen by a Fro-Slavery community, are consequently 
opposed to the Aftti-Slavery cause. They hate it — they 
despise it. Hence it is rightly judged impossible to 
retain a place and influence with such men, and hold 
any connection therewith — it is, indeed, too unpopular. 

"This leads us to notice some of the circumstances 
said to exist in England and not in America, which ren- 
ders it right to join with others in the promotion of the 
Anti-Slavery cause in that country, while in this an 
opposite course is necessary. In order to carry out the 
proscriptive and disfranchising measures to which we 
have referred, a large committee was appointed in the 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FBIENDS. 87 

Yearly Meeting, and one in the Select body to attend 
Subordinate Meetings. These have made considerable 
progress in the work, In one of the Quarterly meetings, 
in their labors to prove a difference of circumstances 
between the two countries, it was observed that, in 'Eng- 
land, it was the wealthy and influential part of the com- 
munity with which Friends associated-— the reverse of 
what was in practice in this country.' And again, c that 
it was those in the foremost ranks of society among 
Friends, who engaged in the work there, 5 and conse- 
quently fchat it was the opposite class who had under- 
taken it here. In all this do we not clearly see that the 
Cross has become a stumbling-block ? Wealth and 
influence, or in other words, 'power makes right.' The 
full development of this principle, truly, is that upon 
which the whole system of American Slavery stands. 
What has become of the self-denying example and the 
uncompromising zeal of a Fox, a Barclay, a Penn, or of 
the whole band of pioneers, in the reformation they 
commenced, with these their highly professing successors 
in a reform of no less importance to the welfare of the 
human family ? 

" Is it by thus yielding to the prejudices, or accommo- 
dating ourselves to the corrupt views and sentiments of 
those around us, or by conniving at their unhallowed 
deeds, that we should seek to promote the cause of truth 
and righteousness in the earth? In an interview which 
some of us had with this committee, one who stands about 
at the head of the opposition, observed that ; The Anti- 
Slavery Societies were almost universally hated, especial- 
ly in the South, and that if Friends should connect them- 
selves therewith, ministers of our Society could have no 
influence with the slaveholders, nor even travel safely 
among them. In the exercise of his gift, if he should 
feel it his duty to go to the South on a gospel mission, he 
wished to be so situated as to have some influence, and 
be in no danger of molestation whilst there.' 

" This objection is a very common one, and it seems to 
be deemed proof positive that it is well grounded, when 



88 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

they can refer to the friendly reception of a visit from 
those who are opposed to these societies, evidently being 
unmindful of, or disregarding, the Scripture declaration, 
4 Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you, for 
so did their fathers to the false prophets.' 

"In accordance with the sweeping system of virtual 
disownment, to which we have referred, eight members 
of the Meeting for Sufferings were reported to the Yearly 
Meeting as unfit for the station, under the vague charge 
of disqualification. And the committee continued, to 
make further report, if other obnoxious members should 
be found. It should constantly be borne in mind that 
the professed cause of the adoption of these proscriptive 
measures, was that of some Friends going contrary to the 
advice and travail of the body ; and surely a disregard of 
the general code of discipline should not be considered of 
less importance. That discipline authorizes the Meeting 
for Sufferings to suggest the removal of members of that 
body, only in consequence of their declining or greatly 
neglecting the attendance of said meeting ; and as the 
members alluded to were among the most regular attend- 
ants thereof, we cannot but regard these proceedings as 
altogether arbitrary ; for admitting the Yearly Meeting to 
have the power to make or change discipline at pleasure 
(as w r as observed), yet nothing of the kind has ever been 
done without making such, a special object of considera- 
tion. And besides this, it should be remembered that 
the Meeting for Sufferings is a subordinate meeting, but 
yet it reported those members, as disqualified, contrary 
to the plain letter of Discipline, and was sustained therein 
by the Yearly Meeting. 

" When this subject came before the meeting, one of 
those thus presented, made request in their behalf in an 
humble and feeling manner, that the Minute should state 
the cause of their disqualification — it was their due — ■ 
justice demanded it. But this request, although reason- 
able as it was, was refused to be granted by the ruling 
party. Thus they were publicly charged with that which 
merited ejection from that body, and yet deprived of 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 89 

knowing in what it consisted, as to any official informa- 
tion. But to return to our narrative respecting the 
Yearly Meeting's committee and that from the Select 
body : the work assigned them is now under rapid pro- 
gress. Ministers and Elders who do not abandon the 
Anti-Slavery societies, or turn their hand against such 
as do not, or, in other words, unite with the ' advice and 
travail of the body,' are by special direction, to be re- 
moved from their stations. Agreeably to the course 
adopted and most strenuously adhered to by the Yearly 
Meeting, these committees have endeavored to prohibit 
any examination of the subject, except on their own side. 
They have invariably manifested a disposition in meet- 
ings, not to hear the reasons we would advance in our 
behalf. In short, like the poor victims for which we 
plead, we are not permitted to plead for ourselves. 

" When we take into consideration the awful state of 
public affairs in these United States, produced through 
the predominance of the slave-holding principle, and 
when, by the visible signs of the times, we are warned 
that the period cannot be very distant when Slavery will 
be abolished, either by peaceful legislation, or in the 
midst of violence and blood ( ; for the needy shall not 
always be forgotten ; the expectation of the poor shall not 
perish forever'), and when we turn in our minds to all 
the noble and mighty achievements wrought through the 
agency of Anti-Slavery Societies, from the first efforts of 
Clarkson and his coadjutors to the final completion of 
British West India emancipation, including the efforts of 
similar societies in this country, by which the foul insti- 
tution was abolished in seven of the original States, and 
when we reflect upon the vast amount of Anti-Slavery 
feeling at the present time in the United States, created 
through these instrumentalities, and that the State Anti- 
Slavery Society of Indiana and its auxiliaries would be 
much weakened without our assistance, the question 
arises, Can we then abandon the cause and be clear of our 
brother's blood ? We cannot. 

" This question being decided, the next is, is it better 



90 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

for us to suffer ourselves to be separately disowned, and 
scattered abroad, to be deprived of the comforts, consola- 
tions and preserving influence of church fellowship, or to 
avail ourselves of our indisputable right to form a reli- 
gious societj 7 in which we can enjoy these privileges? 
The answer to this inquiry, we apprehend, must be obvi- 
ous to every sober and reflecting person who has any 
confidence in the usefulness of religious society. Conse- 
quently w r e have deemed it our duty to adopt the latter 
alternative. Many of us have for a considerable time 
labored with much anxious solicitude for the restoration 
or conversion of many of our brethren in Society, to 
soundness of judgment and purity of principle in regard 
to this subject, and as long as any door of hope w T as left 
unclosed, that this object could be effected, we have been 
made willing to suffer all the contumely they have seen 
meet to pour upon us ; but by the proceedings already 
referred to, we have from all appearances, been complete- 
ly shut out from any access to the feelings and consciences 
of a large number of our fellow members, who have 
thereby been taught to look upon us as transgressors, 
lying under the just and merited censure of the Society, 
and of course unworthy of their confidence and fellow- 
ship. And now, taking into consideration the natural 
and legitimate consequences of the bondman's bleeding 
cause, which must result from this unceasing and increas- 
ing opposition to its advocates, and that by thus remain- 
ing in a formal connection, even if we could, under pres- 
ent circumstances, we should give countenance to its un- 
righteous and anti-christian course; and also reflecting 
upon the situation in which the Society here is involved 
through the prevalence of that spirit which rejects that 
most necessary and salutary advice of our Discipline, to 
manage the affairs of Society in the spirit of meekness 
and wisdom, with decency, forbearance and love to each 
other; which issues advices and renders them equivalent 
to positive injunctions, without listening to, or in many 
instances even suffering the exhibition of the evidence of 
Truth against the propriety of their adoption 5 by a fair 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 91 

and candid examination thereof — which closes the ear 
against the claims of bleeding humanity, by refusing to 
look into the subject of consuming the produce of the 
slave's toil, and the necessary tendency which such a 
practice has to perpetuate his sufferings ; which will not 
allow liberty of conscience in the performance of so obvi- 
ous a duty as that of uniting with our fellow-citizens in 
endeavoring to interest the community in behalf of the 
bondman, and which tramples the discipline and order of 
society under foot, in order to carry out its purposes ! 
therefore we feel bound in justice to this most righteous 
cause, and in order to clear ourselves from any participa- 
tion in the evils and guilt which would be the unavoida- 
ble consequence of the influence which our remaining in 
connection therewith would yield against the cause of 
humanity, publicly, to separate ourselves from that body, 
to obey the Scripture injunction, ; Come out of her my 
people that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye 
receive not of her plagues. 5 

" We wish not to be understood as denying that there 
is any Anti-Slavery feeling among the members of the 
Yearly Meeting, from which we have now seceded; on 
the contrary we doubt not but that many of them are 
desirous to promote immediate and unconditional eman- 
cipation, and are only restrained from active labors in the 
cause by the proscriptive measures of the c Body' so 
called ; measures which have been brought about chiefly 
by the agency of those individuals who, we believe, are 
too anxious to 6 retain a place and influence with the 
rulers of the land.' Our opposers have argued for, and 
some who have appeared to be strong Abolitionists, seem 
to have adopted, the doctrine, that it is the duty of mem- 
bers to yield obedience to the authority of the Yearly 
Meeting even when its requisitions are contrary to their 
own convictions of what is right. Such we conceive to 
be in a very precarious situation, and in danger of 
quenching the spirit, in order to obey the body ; and we 
would recommend to their serious consideration an excel- 
lent saying of William Penn : 



92 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

" c I abhor two principles in religion, and pity them 
that own them. The first is, obedience upon authority 
without conviction ; and the other, destroying them that 
differ from me, for God's sake. Such a religion is with- 
out judgment, though not without teeth ; union is best if 
right. Else charity. 5 

"With entire consciousness of our innocence and the 
justice of our cause, we, in humble confidence in the pro- 
tection of the God of the oppressed, submit that cause to 
Him who judgeth righteously. " 



CHAPTER X. 

An Epistle to London — One to Anti-Slavery Friends. 

The Epistle sent to London Yearly Meeting, is also a 
document which I deem worthy of a place here. 

"|The committee appointed yesterday to draft an address 
to the different Yearly Meetings of Friends, prepared 
them as required, with the exception of one to that of 
Indiana, which was thought not necessary at the present 
time, which were approved, and the Clerk directed to 
sign them on behalf of the meeting. 

That to London Yearly Meeting is as follows : 

" To tlie next Yearly Meeting of Friends to he held in 

London. 
"Deab Friends: — 

"Under a feeling sense of the responsibility 
resting on us, in consequence of the peculiar situa- 
tion in which we are placed, and the measures which we 
have believed ourselves obliged to adopt in order to se- 
cure the privileges of religious society, of which we have 
been deprived by what we consider to be the arbitrary 
proceedings of the Yearly Meeting of which we have 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 93 

heretofore been members, we feel that it will be but an 
act of candor and justice to address you. in order to make 
you acquainted with some of the circumstances which 
have led us to the disagreeable necessity of separating 
from our former religious connection and associating our- 
selves together as a distinct religious organization. All 
we ask of you is, that you will hear us with that candor 
with which we address you, judge of the propriety of our 
conduct impartially, and in the light of Truth, and then 
to extend to us that treatment which you conceive to be 
due. We think that by a careful examination of the 
whole case, you will readily perceive that we were placed 
in such a situation that we could not enjoy our religious 
privileges in our former connection, except at the expense 
of our principles, and that in order to remain in that So- 
ciety, we were required to cease to act in accordance 
with our conscientious belief of required duty. As we 
could not consent to these conditions, we were reduced 
to the necessity of choosing, either to suffer ourselves to 
be scattered abroad, and to lose the preserving and 
strengthening influences of religious society altogether, 
or to take the steps that we have taken, and establish a 
society among ourselves, in which we can enjoy those 
inestimable privileges. 

u To us it appears clear, that we were not only justifia- 
ble in pursuing the latter course, but that it was our im- 
perious duty so to do. We were evidently deprived of 
our religious privileges in, and about to be driven out of, 
our own house (to speak figuratively), and in order to 
shelter ourselves from the inclemencies of the weather, 
we have been obliged to prepare another. Let not this 
figure be misrepresented. It relates only to the organiz- 
ation of the Church, upon the true principles, testimonies 
and discipline of the Society of Friends. 

" We feel, beloved Friends, that we have a strong 
claim upon you for sympathy, for countenance and en- 
couragement, inasmuch as we have been brought into our 
present situation in consequence of pursuing a course of 
conduct which we believed was required at our hands, 



94 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

and in which we have beeen encouraged by your repeated 
and earnest advice, and the example of the most promi- 
nent, virtuous, and influential members of your meeting. 
The Anti-Slavery cause throughout the world is identical. 
It is true, that its advocates do not all agree precisely as 
to the best measures to be used in carrying it forward ; 
but we have no knowledge of any measures advocated by 
any body of Abolitionists, that are inconsistent with your 
practice. A large portion of them believe in the use of 
w r hat is termed u moral suasion," to the exclusion of po- 
litical action ; while another class believe in, and practice 
both. And if we are correctly informed, our Friends on 
your side of the water also make use of both these instru- 
mentalities. But if it were even the case, that a portion 
of the organized associations did advocate and practice 
measures which are impolitic, inconsistent, or immoral, 
would that be a sufficient reason for deserting the cause? 
The absurdity of this course will be evident, when we 
reflect that this objection would be just as strong against 
identifying ourselves with any of the Church organizations 
for the promotion of Christianity. For it is evident that 
some of them advocate and practice things which we be- 
lieve are radical ly wrong. 

• " We earnestly desire that our dear brethren of your 
Yearly Meeting, may not be misled by the specious but 
absurd objection that circumstances in the two countries 
render it right for Friends in England to join in the Anti- 
Slavery enterprise, while it is wrong for us in America 
to do the same thing. You may rest assured that the 
objections and arguments used here, against the practice, 
are just as strong on one side of the water as the other ; 
and our opposers, by condemning us, virtually condemn 
you ; and, indeed, some do not hesitate to censure your 
Anti-Slavery conduct in direct terms. When we reflect 
that your Meeting has contributed largely to the funds of 
an Anti-Slavery Society, composed of Friends and others, 
thus giving such associations the most unequivocal evi- 
dence of its approbation; and that in this country the 
Yearly Meeting has taken the most energetic measures to 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 95 

put down all its members who unite in such associations, 
and even those who have not so united, but are not pre- 
pared to unite with those prescriptive measures ; and to 
exclude the cause and its advocates from our meeting- 
houses, thus depriving them in many places of the oppor- 
tunity of pleading the cause of the poor and needy, the 
conviction is forced upon us, that there is a radical error 
in the conduct of your Yearly Meeting, or of the old 
Yearly Meeting of Indiana. 

u The contrast is exhibited in a glaring manner in the 
facts connected with the proposed World's Convention, to 
be held in London in Sixth month next. The call for 
delegates was signed, as you know, by an esteemed mem- 
ber of your Meeting, as chairman of the Executive Com- 
mittee of the British and Foreign A. S. Society; and for 
responding to that call, for taking part in appointing a 
delegate in compliance with that call, Friends here who 
thus acted, and the Friend who received the appointment, 
are obnoxious to severe censure. Now, can the Friends 
who were instrumental in making that call, when they 
meet in the capacity of the Yearly Meeting of London, 
take any steps which shall, even by implication, cast cen- 
sure on that delegate, and when they meet in the World's 
Convention receive him with cordiality, as they will be 
bound to do? We cannot, we will not believe that our 
dear friends will act thus inconsistently, and by discoun- 
tenancing us, give the severest blow to the Anti-Slavery 
cause in this country which it has ever received. 

"In the important measures which we have adopted, 
we put our confidence in the great Head of the Church, 
and in the principles of immutable Truth. We know the 
Lord can save by many or by few; and we believe in the 
truth of the promise of the Divine Master, 'where two 
or three are gathered together in my name, there am 
1 in the midst of them.' Though we may, like our 
holy Redeemer, be 'despised and rejected of men,' yet 
'the Lord seeth not as man seeth ; man judgeth by 
the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh at the 
heart,' 



96 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

" For a more full statement of our case, we refer you 
to the Declaration issued by this meeting; a copy of which 
we herewith send you. 

" With the salutation of our love, we remain your 
friends." 

The meeting published but one other document at this 
time, namely, an Address to the Anti-Slavery Friends 
within the limits of Indiana Yearly Meeting. I deem it 
worthy the attention of the reader. It is as follows : 

"address . 

" To the Anti-Slavery Friends within the limits of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting. 

"Dear Friends: — 

" In the love of the everlasting Gospel, that 
love which desires the present and eternal welfare 
of the whole human family, we salute you, and wish to 
encourage you to faithfulness in every good work. 

" As many of you have not been with us at this time, 
to witness for yourselves the unanimity, the harmony, 
and brotherly condescension, by which our deliberations 
have been conducted, and, above all, the holy solemnity 
which has covered our assembly, we would say for your 
encouragement, that the overshadowing canopy of Divine 
regard has evidently been felt to cover us, and in rever- 
ent humility and self-abasedness we wish to ascribe all the 
praise to Him who has thus favored as with his holy 
presence, to the confirming of our souls in the belief that 
our thus assembling together has been owned by Him. 

"It is only by a faithful discharge of known duty, that 
we can be entitled to hear the joyful language addressed 
to us, ' well done, good and faithful servant, thou hast 
been faithful over a few things, enter thou into the joy 
of thy Lord. 5 

" Our separation from the Yearly Meeting, with which 
we have heretofore been connected (some of the reasons 
for which may be found in the i Declaration ' issued by 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 97 

this meeting, and in various other documents which are 
before the public), has not been made without due reflec- 
tion, and much anxious inquiry, with breathings of soul 
for proper direction in our tried situation, and strength 
to perform our duty, let our sufferings, in consequence 
thereof, be what they may. Our opposers who have been 
instrumental in promoting those measures by which we 
have been driven to the necessity of taking the important 
step, have urged upon us the doctrine of subordination to 
the Yearly Meeting as unlimited in its application, that 
we are bound by the decisions of that body in all cases 
whatsoever. This doctrine we hold to be an absurdity, 
very nearly bordering upon the papal heresy of infalli- 
bility. 

" For it is clearly a Divine Truth that we are bound 
4 to obey God rather than man.' And to contend that 
we are absolutely bound to obey the decrees of any man 
or body of men, is to contend for the doctrine of infalli- 
bility. The true doctrine of subordination, we conceive 
to be this : the members of the Church are bound to be 
in subordination to its decisions while it acts under the 
influence of the Holy Spirit ; because its acts, when so 
directed, are infallible, and consequently, in accordance 
w T ith the Divine law. To assume that the Yearly Meet- 
ing acted under the Divine direction in requiring us to 
cease our labors in the Anti-Slavery cause, is but to beg 
the question. It is assuming, without proof, the very 
thing that we deny, and which we think is abundantly 
proved to be incorrect, by the contradictory and arbitrary 
measures that have been adopted in relation to this sub- 
ject. If it be admitted that the Yearly Meeting may err, 
the whole doctrine of unqualified submission to its deci- 
sions falls to the ground. If the doctrine contended for 
by our opposing Friends be true, that it is the duty of 
members to submit, even to those decrees of their Church 
which require them to refrain from that which they firmly 
believe God requires at their hands, or to do that which 
they as firmly believe he forbids, then it is clear that all 
who have, at any time, testified against what they believe 



93 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

to be the errors of their respective Churches, have been 
in error. We much desire that none of our Anti-Slavery 
Friends may be carried away by this specious but ex- 
tremely dangerous doctrine, to the conclusion that it is 
their duty to submit to the requirements of the body, 
though they know them to be wrong. Though the unity 
of the brethren is invaluable, let us remember that 
that unity which is purchased by the sacrifice of Truth, 
or a dereliction of duty, is not c the unity of the Spirit in 
the bond of peace,' and can be productive of nothing but 
bitterness, in the end. Let all be subordinate to the 
Truth, and obey the dictates of the Spirit of Truth in 
their own souls, and this will lead them to the true doc- 
trine of Church subordination, which, as we said before, 
is submission to the decisions of the Church, made under 
the influence of the Spirit of Christ, the great Head of 
the Church. This, clear friends, is the true doctrine of 
Friends, and any doctrine of subordination or submis- 
sion beyond this, proceeds from the spirit of Anti- 
Christ. 

"We wish, also, to warn our friends against the falla- 
cious idea that they can refrain from their Anti-Slavery 
labors without sacrificing their principles. When our 
opposers tell you that they do not wish you to sacrifice 
your principles, believe them not. If you are actuated 
by true Anti-Slavery principles, they will lead you to 
Anti-Slavery action ; and you cannot cease from the 
latter without sacrificing the former. 

"Could the apostles have ceased from their labors — 
could they have used their influence to discourage those 
who were laboring in the cause, by shutting the temple 
and the synagogues against them, thus preventing them 
to the extent of their power from all opportunity of 
spreading the religion of Jesus — could they have declined 
to associate with their fellow-Christians, or attend Christ- 
ian meetings, without sacrificing their principles ? If 
they could, then can we comply with the requirements of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends, without sacrificing 
our Anti-Slavery principles. We are frequently told 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 99 

that we are not censured for being Abolitionists. The 
absurdity of this assertion, is as great as it would have 
been for the father ot William Penn to have told him 
that he did not turn him out of doors for being a Quaker; 
or for the martyrs, when chained to the stake, surrounded 
with fire and fagot, to have been told, that they were 
not thus persecuted on account of their religion. Sup- 
pose, however, we could cease our active exertions in be- 
half of the Anti-Slavery cause, and retain our principles, 
what would they be worth ? Like faith without works, 
the}' would be dead. 

" If all the people in the United States wore Abolition- 
ists of this kind, of what advantage would their Aboli- 
tion be to the suffering slave, writhing in agony and 
clanking his chains, or to our guilty country, reeling to 
and fro like a drunken man, under the judgments of an 
offended God ? 

u We have long believed that the time will come, 
when the system of American Slavery will be abolished, 
either in mercy or in judgment; and from the signs of 
the times, we are strongly inclined to the opinion, that 
the time draweth nigh. The ears of the Lord are open 
to the crying of the poor, and the sighing of the needy. 
He hath seen. He hath seen tiie affliction of his people, and 
hath heard their groaning; and we verily believe, He 
hath come down to deliver them. We are deeply im- 
pressed with the conviction, that the hand of the Lord is 
manifest in the present Anti-Slavery enterprise, that it is 
his offer of mercy to a guilty land, which, if it be re- 
jected, may be the last. And how soon He may turn his 
hand in judgment upon us, none of us know. Under a 
view of these solemn considerations, we feel an awful 
responsibility resting on us, and are impressed with the 
necessity of a conscientious discharge of our duty in re- 
gard to this matter, being well assured, that a bare 
belief of the sinfulness of Slavery, without the necessary 
action, will not abolish the system — save our country 
from judgment, nor ourselves from blood guiltiness. 

Let us then, dear Friends, be willing to do for the 



100 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

advancement of this great cause, whatever our hand 
findeth to do, and to do it with our might ; looking for 
success in our labors, to the blessing of Him who alone 
can prosper the work of our hands ; for we well know 
that without such blessing, all our efforts will be unsuc- 
cessful. ' Except the Lord build the house, they labor 
in vain that build it; except the Lord keep the city, the 
watchman watcheth but in vain.' 

■ 4 And now, dear brethren and sisters, suffer, we be- 
seech you, the word of exhortation. Be increasingly 
careful to maintain unsullied, all the doctrines and testi- 
monies of the Gospel, as we have received them, to hold up 
to the world. Manifest by a holy life and conversation that 
you are truly devoted to the cause of your Holy Re- 
deemer. Let not the world nor its allurements entice 
you from the true simplicity of the Gospel, that all 
around you may have the evidence, that while you are 
engaged in the lawful concerns of time, and in the pro- 
motion of the reformation of the world, your treasure is 
in Heaven. 'Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but 
rather give place unto wrath.' c As much as lieth in you, 
live peaceably with all men,' and earnestly seek after and 
cultivate that heavenly disposition which will enable you 
to pray for your enemies, and in truth and sincerity to 
say : ' Father, forgive them, they know not what they do.' " 



CHAPTER XI. 

The Policy of the Leaders in the Opposition to A. S. F., changed— 
Address of their Meeting for Sufferings, touching the Separation. 

As soon as the Separation was in de facto made, the 
leaders in the proscription all at once reversed their pol- 
icy. Instead of carrying out the advices, and those too, 
which they had claimed to have come from Divine au- 
thority, they violated them as completely as the Aboli- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 101 

tionists had done. They immediately, at the very next 
meetings for business, or at least, at a number of them, 
rather went out of their way to appoint those on import- 
ant business, who were known to be in open violation of 
the advices and fcfavail of the body, which they had said 
a few months previous, in a Yearly Meeting capacity, 
rendered such manifestly unsuitable for services in it. 

Their object, as every one knew, was to prevent such 
from joining the Separation. But this was not Yearly 
Meeting business, although, without doubt, it had the 
sanction of the leading influences in it. Had the privi- 
leges been granted by the Yearly Meeting only a few 
months sooner, which were granted after the Separation 
by some of the Subordinate meetings, that separation 
would never have taken place. 

Shortly after the close of the Yearly Meeting at New- 
port, that is, on the 6th of Third month, the Meeting for 
Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting was convened by 
special call. It adopted the following Address, and cir- 
culated it amongst the Members : 



" From the Meeting for Sufferings, of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting of Friends, held at White Water, in Wayne 
County, Indiana, by adjournments, on the 6th and 7th of 
the Third month, 1843. 

" To the Quarterly, Monthly, and Preparative Meet- 
ings of Friends, within the limits of Indiana 
Yearly Meeting, and, to Friends individually. 

" Dear Friends : — 

Ci Our Meeting has been called together at this time, 
on a painful occasion. In the progress of the workings 
of a spirit of activity, self-confidence, and insubordina- 
tion, which has for some time past been apparent among 
a portion of the members of this Yearly Meeting, an- 
other Separation from our religious Society has been 
effected, and a new and independent Association has 
been organized, bearing the title of 'Indiana Yearly Meet- 

5* 



102 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

ing of Anti-Slavery Friends.' This new organization 
took place at Newport, within the limits of New Garden 
Quarter, on the 7th of last month ; and those forming it, 
proceeded, as we understand, to adopt a Discipline, to 
appoint a Meeting for Sufferings, to address each of the 
Yearly Meetings of Friends, and to do other such busi- 
ness as is common in the Yearly Meetings of our reli- 
gious society. 

" We think it our duty, to give you early notice of this 
state of things, and to apprise you that the new Associa- 
tion is one with which, being set up out of the good 
order, and contrary to the discipline and usages of our 
society, we can have no correspondence or communica- 
tion. 

" In their Declaration of the causes of their Separa- 
tion, which has recently appeared, many charges are put 
forth, affecting unfavorably, the religious character and 
standing of the Yearly Meeting of Friends in Indiana, 
and many of our well-concerned members. One of these, 
which stands conspicuous in many parts of the document, 
and also in other publications of theirs, and which has 
been largely circulated by them, is, that the Society com- 
posing our Yearly Meeting is opposing the abolition of 
Slavery ; that it, by its measures, is countenancing and 
supporting Slave-holders, Slave-holding, and Slavery ; 
and that our well known Christian testimony against 
Slavery is not maintained ; in the place of which, apathy 
and the fear of popular sentiment, have been suffered to 
get possession ; and that lukewarmness, and the want of 
a disposition to do anything for the slave has been the 
consequence. Another is, that the proceedings of our 
Yearly Meeting, in its own acts, and of the subordinate 
meetings, in carrying out its advices, have been arbitrary, 
proscriptive, irregular, and contrary to discipline. These, 
and various other charges, equally untrue and unfounded 
against the Yearly and other meetings and their com- 
mittees, and individuals acceptably filling responsible 
stations in Society have been made and widely circulated. 
We have no expectation on the present occasion, of going 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 103 

into an examination and refutation singly of the various 
charges that have come to our knowledge. But we think 
it right to take this opportunity to declare that our So- 
ciety in this Yearly Meeting, has not relaxed in its testi- 
mony against Slavery; that on the contrary, it is the 
united belief of this meeting, that the testimony has been 
growing stronger among us for many years past, and 
that our Yearly Meeting earnestly desires to improve 
every right opening, under the influence of the Holy 
Spirit, to advocate the cause of universal and uncondi- 
tional emancipation ; and to manifest, on all proper occa- 
sions, our testimony against Slavery an,d oppression. 
Our members have also been desired, in the Advices is- 
sued by the Yearly Meeting, to do the same thing; not- 
withstanding it has been thought right to advise them 
not to mix, for that purpose, with the popular associa- 
tions of the day. By reference to the Minutes of our 
Yearly Meeting for the last five years or more, copies of 
which have been furnished to the families, this will more 
fully appear. 

" In 1836, an edition of two thousand copies of an 
Epistle on Slavery, was printed for circulation, besides 
three thousand copies more of the same, which was con- 
tained in the Minutes of the Yearly Meeting, and fur- 
nished to the families. In this Epistle, which was intro- 
ductory to a valuable one received from the Yearly Meet- 
ing of Friends in London, Friends were advised to take 
no part in the unrighteous work of expatriation, it being 
the judgment of the meeting that the slaves are entitled 
to their freedom without condition ; and that conditions 
cannot therefore be justly attached to the right to be 
free. It was also proposed, whether it might not then 
i be most safe for the members of our religious society to 
refrain from becoming members of other societies, having 
for their object, the extinction of Slavery. 

" In 1837, an Address on Slavery to all in the United 
States who professed the Christian religion, and hope for 
salvation through the mercy and merits of our Lord and 
Saviour Jesus Christ, was adopted, and 20,000 copies 



104: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

printed and widely circulated. A Memorial was also sent to 
Congress, in the same year, protesting against the annexa- 
tion of Texas to the United States, in which it was dis- 
tinctly set out, as the main objection to the annexation, 
that Slavery and the Slave-trade might thereby be 
perpetuated c to a fearful extent.' 

" At the Yearly Meeting in 1838, Friends were invited 
by the African committee, standing appointed by the 
Yearly Meeting, to renewed exertions in behalf of suffer- 
ing humanity, by endeavoring to spread the concern, 
and enlighten the minds of the people, by giving circu- 
lation to such publications as are calculated to advance 
the cause of emancipation on Christian principles, while 
it was also 'deemed best,' for reasons then given, that 
our members should abstain from mixing with associa- 
tions of those not of our Society, for the purpose. At 
the next Yearly Meeting, the committee having been en- 
gaged as usual, in active exertions for the good of the 
free people of color among us, expressed their belief 
that there was an increasing interest and concern felt in 
the minds of many Friends, to promote the entire aboli- 
tion of Slavery. 

" In 1840, an Epistle was issued by the Meeting for 
Sufferings, and approved by the Yearly Meeting, in 
which the meeting expressed its satisfaction in knowing 
that others were engaging in the work in which our 
Society has been so long engaged, and desiring Friends 
not to indulge in apathy or lukewarmness, nor relax their 
labors, in all suitable openings, for the benefit of the 
colored race; repeating, at the same time, the advice 
before given, not to join the Abolition and Colonization 
Societies. The Yearly Meeting also directed the reprint- 
ing of an Epistle from the Yearly Meeting of Friends in 
London, on the subject of Slavery, to the number of five 
thousand copies, to be annexed to our Minutes for distri- 
bution to the families, and the Meeting for Sufferings 
afterward directed three thousand more for general circu- 
lation. The attention of the Meeting for Sufferings was 
also drawn to the subject of petitioning the Legislatures 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 105 

of Indiana and Ohio, and of the general Government in 
behalf of the African race; but no way opening, in the 
right authority, to petition Congress, special deputations 
of Friends were sent with petitions, this year and also 
in 1841 again, to both the State Legislatures, in behalf 
of the people of color, who caused the petitions to be 
presented, and remained some time at the seats of Gov- 
ernment engaged in active labors among the members. 

" In 1841, in an Epistle to the subordinate meetings, 
issued by the Yearly Meeting, it is said that it is far from 
the wish of this meeting to induce, on the part of our 
members, an apathy of feeling on the deeply affecting 
subject of Slavery. On the contrary, a desire was ex- 
pressed 'that all may faithfully maintain this Christian 
testimony, and cherish a lively interest both for the 
oppressed and oppressors ;' agiain repeating the advice 
not to join in association with those who do not profess 
to wait for Divine direction in such important concerns. 

" In 1842, the Meeting for Sufferings directed the 
reprint, for circulation mostly in the slave States, of 
three thousand copies of an 'Appeal to the professors of 
Christianity in the Southern States and elsewhere on the 
subject of Slavery, by the representatives of the Yearly 
Meeting of Friends for New England,' in which the hor- 
rors of the Slave-trade are strongly set out, and in which 
it is shown that the trade must derive its support from 
the unrighteous system of Slavery, etc. 

" In addition to the forenamed public acts of the 
meetings, it is well known that many concerned indivi- 
duals were also engaged, as way opened, in labors in the 
same cause ; some of whom extended their labors into 
the slave States. 

" After all these public demonstrations of the Society 
by our Yearly Meeting, how can it be said with any 
degree of fairness and truth, that we have been doing 
nothing before the public on the subject of Slavery ? 

"In the exercise and travail of the Society for the last 
few years, since the spirit of over-active zeal and insub- 
ordination made its appearance, we have esteemed it a 



106 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

special favor of our heavenly Father and merciful Pre- 
server, that the Ministers and other concerned Friends 
from other Yearly Meetings, who have, in the prosecu- 
tion of their religious services, visited our Yearly Meet- 
ing and participated with us in feeling, have mostly, and 
so far as we know without exception, approved and 
sanctioned the Advices issued by this meeting and the 
Yearly Meeting on the subjects relating to Slavery, and 
have given us united support and assistance in those 
measures of which the Separatists so loudly complain. 

"In regard to the measures alluded to before as being 
arbitrary and proscriptive, and which are set out as being 
another cause of separation, it may be proper to remark, 
that the proceedings alluded to, are believed to be in 
accordance with the usages of our Society. We think 
that the Epistle of Advice, issued by our late Yearly 
Meeting, made out in accordance with the proceedings of 
the meeting, in which it is said that 'those who have 
distinguished themselves by opposition or disregard to 
the advices and travail of the body, are manifestly un- 
suitable for important services in it while they remain in 
that situation,' no new principle or practice is recom- 
mended. It has, we believe, been a common practice in 
our Society, to leave off from all important appointments 
and stations in the Church, such as are out of unity with 
the body for any cause ; and all such as are standing 
against the Discipline or Advices. It has not been com- 
mon to disown such speedily, without first extending 
brotherly counsel and labor for their reclamation; nor 
were any disowned or cut off by our last Yearly Meeting; 
measures were only adopted, in accordance with the 
usages of Society, to discontinue from service, while they 
remain in their present condition, persons who had given 
much practical evidence of alienation, opposition, and 
disunity with the proceedings and advices, and not for 
bearing a faithful testimony against Slavery, as has been 
erroneously stated. And we have felt ourselves reli- 
giously concerned to proceed to do such duties as were 
required at our hands, in mildness and tenderness, and 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 107 

under the influence of heavenly love and forbearance; 
and while it is still our concern and prayer to perform 
faithfully, firmly, and promptly those duties required at 
our hands, in the proper support of our discipline, and 
the good order of the Church, it is our desire, for our- 
selves and our members generally, to proceed cautiously, 
mildly, and tenderly. 

' ; Finally, dear Friends, we wish you, in your testi- 
mony against Slavery, which we desire you by no means 
to abate, to exercise the spirit and follow the practice of 
our dear departed friend, John Woolman, and other 
worthy predecessors of the same practices, whom we 
have been slanderously charged with discarding. We 
again renewedly state, that we still adhere to our ancient 
principles and testimony in regard to Slavery, and that 
we desire and advocate unconditional emancipation ; be- 
lieving that all men, without regard to color or nation, 
are equally objects of redeeming love through Christ 
Jesus our Lord, and equally entitled to freedom. 

" Signed by direction and on behalf of the Meeting 
aforesaid. " Elijah Coffin, 

"Clerk for the present meeting? 



CHAPTER XII. 

Reply to the Address of the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 

Meeting. 

Upon the publication of the above, the Meeting for 
Sufferings, of the newly organized body convened and 
addressed those who issued it as follows: 

"address 
u To the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 

Meeting of Friends. 
" Dear Friends : — 

"An Address to the Quarterly, Monthly, and Prepa- 
rative meetings, constituting your Yearly Meeting, issued 



108 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

by you at a called meeting on the 6th and 7th nit., has 
been read among us ; and as we conceive there are seve- 
ral assertions and statements contained in it calculated 
to mislead the unsuspicious and unwary, we feel con- 
cerned to address you for the purpose of expostulation 
and explanation ; and to defend ourselves and the cause 
we have espoused from what we consider to be some of 
the erroneous charges which we think you have (perhaps 
erroneously) made. And as you have declared in the 
commencement of your Address, that you can have no 
correspondence or communication with us, we proceed 
at once to address you through the medium of the press, 
hoping that you will read it individually, and that others 
who have seen your charges against us, may have an 
opportunity to see our defense. 

" You say, c In the progress of the workings of a spirit 
of activity, self-confidence, and insubordination, which 
has for some time past been apparent among a portion 
of the members of this Yearly Meeting, another separa- 
tion from our religious Society has been effected,' etc. 

" C A spirit of activity V Then it seems that, in your 
opinion, a spirit of inactivity is the spirit that should 
govern Christians. 'We have not so learned Christ.' 
Neither by precept nor example did our holy Redeemer, 
when personally upon earth, encourage a spirit of inacti- 
vity. On the contrary, his life was a scene of activity; 
He almost constantly ' went about doing good.' And by 
his precepts he inculcated the same active philanthropy; 
urging his followers to good works, commending the 
good Samaritan for flying to the relief of a suffering fel- 
low-being, and, by implication, at least, condemning the 
high-professing priest and Levite for their inactivity in 
neglecting to administer to the necessity of a suffering 
brother. We find no censures heaped upon the head of 
this Samaritan who was despised by the self-righteous 
Scribes and Pharisees ; he was not charged with a spirit 
of activity, of acting in his ' own will' and in his \ own 
strength.' Neither clo we find the priest and the Levite 
commended for waiting for a ; right opening' to adminis- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 109 

ter comfort to the afflicted and help to him who had fallen 
among thieves. We do not discover that either Christ 
or his Apostles ever censured activity in doing good to 
men. But he did on one occasion, at least, censure that 
exclusive spirit which, we fear, actuates many of his pro- 
fessed followers in our day. At a certain time John 
said to him, ; Master, we saw one casting out devils in 
thy name, and we forbade him because he followed not 
with us. And Jesus said, forbid him not, he that is not 
against us is for us.' And we firmly believe, if we are 
sincerely engaged to follow in his footsteps, and to imi- 
tate his example in acts of mercy and humanity and in 
pleading the cause of the poor and needy, we shall find 
room enough for activity, and the necessary aid of His 
Holy Spirit will be afforded to direct our efforts and to 
crown them with ultimate success. The truth is, we are 
taught by the highest authority to seek out occasions of 
activity in doing good by administering to the necessi- 
ties, and promoting the welfare of our fellow-creatures, 
and not to excuse ourselves and discourage others there- 
from under a pretense of waiting for the 6 right open- 
ings.' In this particular, as in other matters, our duty 
is to i seek,' and the promise is, s we shall find.' 

" The next charge you make against us is ' self-confi- 
dence.- 1 Permit us to ask you by what authority you 
make this charge. Do you find evidence of it in our 
publications? Have we not — have not Abolitionists 
generally, manifested in their writings, their full convic- 
tion of the inefficiency of all their labors, unattended by 
the sustaining hand of the God of the oppressed ? What 
evidence, we ask again, have you that we have confi- 
dence in our own unassisted exertions, to advance the 
great work in which we are engaged i Tou have given 
no proof of the truth of the charge in your Address, and 
you may rest assured that charges without proof are but 
weak arguments. If, upon reflection and examination, 
you find yourselves unable to sustain this or any other 
complaint you have made against us, will you not have 
the candor to take it back ? 
6 



110 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

"With regard to the charge of insubordination, we 
have stated our views of true subordination, in the Ad- 
dress to Anti-Slavery Friends, published in the proceed- 
ings of our Yearly Meeting, which we suppose most of 
you have read. If these views are unsound, it would 
become you to point out that unsoundness, rather than 
make a sweeping charge and leave it unsupported by 
facts. While the action of the Yearly Meeting on the 
subject of Abolition amounted to nothing more than ad- 
vice against active labors in the cause, we do not con- 
ceive that it was insubordination to act counter thereto in 
compliance with our individual convictions of duty; but 
when that advice began to be enforced as a positive rule, 
and members filling responsible stations in society were 
removed in consequence of their firmness in the cause, 
when measures were put in operation with a view to the 
laying down of meetings on this account, a proper regard 
to subordination rendered a submission or separation ab- 
solutely necessary, for we could no longer remain in the 
connection, and carry out our principles, without being 
justly obnoxious to the charge of insubordination. Dur- 
ing the progress of the last Yearly Meeting at White 
Water, it became evident that Anti-Slavery Friends had 
no reason to expect any favor, but that they must give 
up their principles or carry them out in opposition to the 
authority of the meeting, until they should be disowned 
or separate. This was not done hastily. Toward the 
close of the Yearly Meeting, a proposition was publicly 
made for Anti-Slavery Friends to remain in the house 
at the rise of the meeting, for the purpose of conferring 
upon their peculiarly tried situation, being virtually cast 
out of the bosom of Society, and deprived of its benefits. 
With this proposition considerable unity was expressed, 
and no objection made to it. But at the rise of the 
meeting, what was our surprise when one of your mem- 
bers walked into the ministers 5 gallery, and in the name 
of the Trustees of the house, addressed us, before our 
conference commenced, first calling us Friends, and then 
recalling it, saying he would call us people, peremptorily 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. Ill 

ordered us to leave the house, declaring that the door- 
keeper would immediately proceed to close the doors and 
windows. We were thus apparently reduced to the ne- 
cessity of leaving the house. We then concluded to meet 
the next day at Newport, when a conference was held for 
the purpose of considering our situation, with a view to 
ascertain our proper course. In this conference a unani- 
mous desire was felt and expressed, that unity and har- 
mony might be restored upon the right foundation. 
Many Friends hoped that there would be a mitigation, 
or relaxation of severity in the measures of opposing 
Friends. With these views it was unitedly concluded 
to wait the action of the Yearly Meeting's Committee 
and of the subordinate meetings. But as time rolled on, 
it became more and more evident that nothing short of 
absolute submission on our part would produce reconcil- 
iation ; and we became satisfied that the time had come 
wherein we were under the necessity of organizing a re- 
ligious society, in which we could enjoy those invaluable 
privileges of which we had been deprived. We make 
these statements, in order that all may know that these 
things were not hastily done, but that we moved cau- 
tiously and deliberately, and, as we believe, not in a 
spirit of self-confidence, but in the fear of the Lord, and 
under the influence of His good spirit. Our deliberations 
were characterized by the utmost harmony, our assem- 
blies were crowned with the solemnizing influence of the 
Divine presence, and, by the favors bestowed upon us, 
both immediately and instrumentally, our hearts were 
confirmed in the belief that we were pursuing the path 
of daty. 

" In speaking of the organization of our Yearly Meet- 
ing, you say, among other things, that those forming it, 
proceeded, as we understand, to adopt a Discipline. Per- 
mit us to ask you, what was your object in using this 
mode of expression ? You speak of our Declaration as 
having recently appeared ; in the second paragraph of 
that Declaration, it is declared, that \ We wish it distinct- 
ly understood, that we have adopted no new doctrine. 



112 HISTORY Off THE SEPARATION IN 

nor any new system of church government.' And in the 
opening of the proceedings of the Convention, it is set 
forth as the object of that Convention, to deliberate more 
fully upon the propriety of reorganizing the Yearly 
Meeting of Indiana upon the true principles, and in ac- 
cordance with the discipline and usages of the Society of 
Friends. If you had occasion to allude to the circum- 
stance at all, why was it not done fairly ? Why was a 
form of expression used, which must of necessity convey 
a false impression to the minds of all who are ignorant 
of the real state of the case ? We appeal to your own 
understandings. Does not your language fairly imply 
that the discipline, which you say we have adopted, is 
something new, something different from the published 
Discipline of Indiana Yearly Meeting ? We appeal to 
your sense of justice. Is it fair to use language in refer- 
ence to the acts of others, that will convey an erroneous 
and an unfavorable impression to the public mind ? 

" Again, you say, c In their Declaration of the causes 
of their separation, which has recently appeared, many 
charges are put forth, affecting unfavorably the religious 
character and standing of the Yearly Meeting of Friends 
of Indiana, and many of our well concerned members. 
One of these which stands conspicuous in many parts of 
the document, and also in other publications of theirs, 
and which has been largely circulated by them, is, that 
the Society composing our Yearly Meeting is opposing 
the abolition of Slavery, etc.' If you mean to convey the 
idea, that we have charged your Yearly Meeting with 
directly opposing the abolition of Slavery, by speaking in 
its defense, or against its abolition, we believe no such 
charge is to be found in our Declaration or any other 
publication of ours. But w T e admit that we have charged 
the Yearly Meeting and 'many of its concerned mem- 
bers,' as you call them, with ; countenancing and sup- 
porting, by their measures, slaveholders, slaveholding 
and slavery,' and we gave facts in support of those 
charges. And here let it be remarked, that generally, if 
not always, we have exhibited the facts upon which our 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 11 3 

charges are founded. In your notice of these charges, it 
certainly became you to notice the facts given to substan- 
tiate them, and either to show that they were not facts, or 
that the charges were not fairly deducible from them. 
Instead of which you have enumerated various acts of the 
Yearly Meeting within the last seven years, as evidence 
of its real Anti-Slavery character. We wish you dis- 
tinctly to notice that our charges against the Yearly 
Meeting are not that it advocates Slavery, or that it has 
not officially and repeatedly condemned it. But that by 
its anxiety to avoid the odium attached to the Abolition- 
ists, and from other motives, it has exerted its influence 
in such a way as to increase the prejudice against, and 
opposition to, the present Anti-Slavery enterprise, and 
consequently to retard the progress of the work, and in- 
crease the popular excitement which seems so much to be 
dreaded. 

"We would, however, remark, with respect to the 
Anti-Slavery publications to which you allude, as having 
been issued by the Meeting within the last few years, 
that it is well known that most, or all of them were 
brought forth by the influence of those who have since 
been proscribed, but who at that time possessed consid- 
erable influence in the Society. It is a notorious fact, 
that most of the Minutes, Epistles and Addresses held up 
by you, as an evidence of your soundness, were written 
by some of those against whom the most rigorous oppo- 
sition has since been directed, and that those very meas- 
ures were met at the time by the opposition of some who 
are now among the leading members of your Society. 
Those very acts, which you now boast of, have frequent- 
ly been condemned by some of your most active mem- 
bers, upon the plea that they were not really the senti- 
ments of the Yearly Meeting, but were the works of a 
few Abolitionists, and passed through the meeting with- 
out due consideration. Do you not know that the re- 
publication of the fc valuable Epistle from the Yearly 
Meeting of London,' in 1836, of which you speak, was 
strenuously opposed ; and that the propriety of the 



114: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

measure was advocated by those who are now the objects 
of your censure? Are you, or are you not, aware that 
the most important quotations you have made, and others 
still more strongly tinctured with Abolition, which you 
have either designedly or inadvertently omitted, were 
written by some of us, and were opposed by some who 
are now in your foremost ranks ? I)o you not know that 
the condemnation of the Colonization scheme was most 
strenuously opposed by the same class ? And that, final- 
ly, the opposition grew so strong, that an Epistle of 
Advice, prepared by a committee of the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings in Sixth month, 1839, was rejected, principally 
on account of its hostility to Colonization ? What can be 
plainer than that there has been a settled design in the 
minds of some individuals strenuously devoted to Coloni- 
zation, to prostrate the influence of those Friends who 
were truly attached to the Anti-Slavery cause. This 
they have succeeded in, by working upon the prejudices 
and sectarian feelings of those who do not so well under- 
stand the tendency of the measures in progress. Of what 
avail, we ask, will all your professions of hostility to 
Slavery be to the cause of suffering humanity, while it is 
known that you use all your influence to prevent the ad- 
vocates of that cause from getting access to the people, 
by closing doors of meeting-houses against them, and so 
demeaning yourselves toward them as to convince all 
around you, that you consider them as unworthy of no- 
tice, except to speak evil of them ; and adopt the most 
rigid measures to prevent your members from associating 
with them in their labors ? 

" Why do you represent us as saying that Indiana 
Yearly Meeting has 'been doing nothing before the public 
on the subject of Slavery. 5 If you will examine our De- 
claration, which you speak of, you will find that we have 
quoted more from the Anti-Slavery labors of the Yearly 
Meeting than you have ; and beside, in our quotations 
from, and references to, those labors, we have shown the 
Anti-Slavery feeling which some years ago, influenced to 
a considerable extent, the deliberations of that body. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 115 

For instance, you say : ; Friends were advised to take 
no part in the unrighteous work of expatriation, it being 
the judgment of this meeting, that the slaves are entitled 
to their freedom without conditions. 5 Why did you ne- 
glect to say that the advice was equally pointed against 
rendering any aid to this work — - to any political associa- 
tion on the subject of African Slavery, which is or may 
be founded on principles, either directly or indirectly 
having a tendency to promote the unrighteous work of 
expatriation V Why, but because it would have shown 
in a stronger light the glaring violation of this advice, 
by the Clerk of the Yearly Meeting, in contributing to 
the funds of the Colonization Society, which we all 
know was in a very particular manner aimed at in the 
expressions quoted \ 

wi Again, why did you not tell the public that the 
Tearlv Meetino; had some Years as;o, £ affection atelv ad- 
vised Friends to be so alive to our testimony against Slav- 
ery, as, neither through prejudice or otherwise, to cast 
any discouragement in the way of those who are faith- 
fully laboring to promote universal emancipation, whether 
such laborers be found within or without the pale of our 
Society V Why, but because the advice is so diametrically 
opposed both to the principles and practice of those who 
now rule in your counsels \ 

" Would it not have been proper for you to have 
quoted from the Yearly Meeting's Minutes, where, in 
allusion to the present A. S. enterprise, it is called a 
most righteous work \ This did not suit you, because of 
its contrast with the opinion professed by Henry Clay, 
and by many in the front ranks of your Yearly Meeting 
at the present time, that the Abolitionists have put back 
the cause of emancipation. 

"Why did you not refer to the feeling of the Yearly 
Meeting, expressed in language like this ? We rejoice that 
others are coming up to labor on the same ground 
which we, as a religious society, have for many years occu- 
pied. 

" Was it because it would have shown in too glaring 









116 HISTORY OW THE SEPARATION IN 

colors the inconsistency of your present policy, in closing 
the doors of meeting-houses against the cause and its 
advocates, who are laboring on the same ground that we, 
as a religious society, have for many years occupied, and 
casting every discouragement you can in their way, and 
proscribing your members who persevere in co-working 
with them ? 

" Should you not also have mentioned, that some 
years ago, Friends were individually encouraged i to a 
close examination as to what is required at their hands, 
and how they may employ the talents committed to them 
for noble purposes, in the advancement of the blessed 
work of universal emancipation, by meekly yet boldly 
either publicly or privately, pleading the cause of the 
oppressed V But perhaps you were aware that if you had 
quoted this advice, it would have shown too clearly the 
palpable inconsistency of your present course in perse- 
cuting those who are conscientiously endeavoring to act 
in accordance with its requirements. 

u It is also worthy of observation, that in your De- 
claration of your Anti-Slavery principles, you have en- 
tirely omitted to make it known, whether you are in 
favor of immediate emancipation or not. And what 
renders the omission still more remarkable, is the fact, 
that quoting from the Minutes of 183S, where the circu- 
lation of such publications as are calculated to advance 
the cause of immediate emancipation is encouraged, you 
have (shall we say carefully?) omitted the word 'imme- 
diate.' What renders this omission still more suspicious, 
is the declared opinion of one of your number, who was 
appointed a member of your body in the place of one of 
those who were said to be disqualified, that he did not 
believe the slaves were prepared for freedom — that he 
believed Slavery should be abolished, but that it ought 
to be done gradually. This opinion was expressed since 
his appointment. Still more. The prime mover of 
nearly, if not quite all the recent measures of the Yearly 
Meeting against A. S. Friends, one of the committee 
appointed to carry its proscriptive measures into opera- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 117 

tion, stated in a large Quarterly Meeting, that when he 
had taken the whole subject of Slavery into considera- 
tion, and the situation and circumstances with which we 
are surrounded, he had never been able to determine what 
would be the best plan for the emancipation of the slaves, 
the best both for whites and blacks ; this was united with 
publicly, by nearly all the committee in attendance from 
the Yearly Meeting ; clearly implying that they were 
not prepared to say that immediate emancipation is the 
best plan. 

Si You say, c At the next Yearly Meeting, the commit- 
tee having been engaged as usual, in active exertions for 
the good of the Free people of Color among us, expressed 
their belief, that there was an increasing interest and 
concern felt in the minds of many Friends, to promote 
the entire Abolition of Slavery.' This opinion was no 
doubt true; and as this feeling continued to increase, the 
opposition also increased, and a determination was more 
and more manifested, on the part of certain characters, 
to destroy the influence and the standing of those Friends 
who were zealously engaged in the A. S. enterprise. 
This 4 increasing interest and concern, to promote the 
entire Abolition of Slavery, was not to be thus suppressed. 
It increased, and continued to increase, until the opposi- 
tion could no longer restrain it by its proscription, and 
we humbly hope that it may continue to increase, until, 
by the blessing of Heaven, every yoke, civil, political, 
and ecclesiasticsl shall be broken, and. every bondman 
shall be tree. 5 

" You mention the fact, that special deputations of 
Friends were sent to the Legislatures of Ohio and Indi- 
ana, with petitions on behalf of the People of Color in 
these States, and that they 4 remained some time at the 
seats of Government, engaged in active labors among 
the members.' But you do not tell the fact, that one 
part of those labors was to satisfy the members that the 
petitioners had no connection with the Abolitionists. 
They knew that Abolitionists were hated, and in order 






118 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

to make themselves and the Society respected, they took 
the most effectual course to increase that hatred. For it 
was enough to confirm the strongest prejudices, not only 
of the members of the Legislatures, but of the commun- 
ity at large, to know that Friends denied any unity with 
the ' fanatics,' as they were commonly considered. Was 
this in accordance with the advice, ' to be very careful 
that we should not through prejudice or otherwise, cast 
any discouragement in the way of those who are faithfully 
laboring to promote universal emancipation V You men- 
tion the reprint of 3,000 copies of an c Appeal to the 
professors of Christianity in the Southern States and 
elsewhere, on the subject of Slavery.' In that appeal, it 
is stated, that the professional Churches are mainly 
chargeable with the continuance of Slavery. Nov/ we 
would request you, candidly and honestly to ask your- 
selves, if it is not evident that you are exerting a greater 
influence against the progress of the present A. S. enter- 
prise, than any other religious body in the United States? 
In the various localities throughout the country where 
Friends are numerous, as a general rule, a stranger might 
really obtain a very correct knowledge of the state of the 
Anti-Slavery cause in the community, by learning the 
course pursued with regard to it by Friends residing in 
the respective neighborhoods. "Wherever Friends gener- 
ally, especially the leading characters, have identified 
themselves with this cause, there the community is to a 
great extent leavened into the Anti-Slavery principles. 
But where the contrary course of conduct has been pur- 
sued by Friends, there the cause receives very little favor 
from the mass of the people. The strongest opposers, 
both in the Free and Slave States, exult in the action of 
the ruling part of the Society of Friends, and it is com- 
mon with those opposers, to refer to the course Friends 
are pursuing, both collectively and individually, with re- 
gard to this subject, in confirmation of their opinions. 
In the numerous discussions public and private, which 
are going on throughout the country on this subject, 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 119 

there is perhaps no argument on which the opposers of 
Abolition rely with more confidence, than that drawn 
from the conduct of Friends. 

"With regard to the countenance given to the laborers 
in the A. S. cause, by those whom you call 4 well-con- 
cerned members,' it was fully illustrated in the case of 
C. C. Burleigh, to which we referred in our Declaration. 
The contrast between this case, and the marked attention 
paid to a Colonization agent, since in Richmond, shows 
too clearly to be misunderstood, whether Abolition or 
Colonization is regarded with most favor, by such men 
as lead in your deliberations, notwithstanding the 
Yearly Meeting but a few years ago called the former a 
most righteous cause, and the latter ' the unrighteous 
work of expatriation.' The attention paid to Henry 
Clay, the great slave-holder and President of the Colon- 
ization Society also shows conclusively, that there is far 
more anxiety to conciliate the good opinion of slave- 
holders and Colonizationists, that you may 6 retain place 
and influence with the rulers of the land,' than to iden- 
tify yourselves in feeling and interest with the humble 
and devoted, yet despised advocates of the claims of 
down-trodden humanity. 

"After enumerating several public acts in reference to 
Slavery, you say, ' In addition to the forenamed public 
acts of the meetings, it is well known that many con- 
cerned individuals were also engaged, as way opened, in 
labors in the same cause, some of whom extended their 
labors into the slave States.' Who were those concerned 
individuals ? And what was the nature of their labors ? 
We are perfectly aware that many individuals have man- 
ifested great concern, and have labored with zeal and 
assiduity to put down the Anti-Slavery enterprise, by 
going up and down the country preaching down all those 
who were influenced by ; a spirit of activity in it.' In- 
deed it has been the principal theme of a great portion 
of the preaching that we have had for some years. In- 
stead of being urged to the necessity of seeking after 
ability to perform works of humanity and mercy, and 






120 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

encourged to faithfulness in their performance, we have 
seldom heard but little else than exhortations to 'be still,' 
to 'get into the quiet,' with long discourses upon the dan- 
ger of ' acting in our own wills, and in our own strength.' 
As though it were far safer to imitate the example of the 
Priest and Levite in passing by a perishing brother, than 
with the good Samaritan to yield immediately to the 
generous impulses of the heart, and feelings of sympathy 
with the sufferings of a common humanity, which prompt 
us to endeavor to pour the oil and the wine of consolation 
into the bleeding wounds of the millions of our fellow- 
beings who have fallen among thieves. If the same 
zeal had been manifested, and the same labor bestowed 
to promote the Anti-Slavery cause, and to recommend it 
and its advocates to the favorable notice of the public, 
that have been used to banish it from the Society of 
Friends, and consequently to disgrace it before the pub- 
lic, we are perfectly satisfied that it would have been far 
in advance of what it is. We are also aware that one of 
the most noted ministers and indefatigable opposers 
among you, has been engaged, to some extent, within 
the last year or two, in circulating an 'Appeal to the 
citizens of the United States and Great Britain,' written 
by him some years ago, in favor of the Colonization So- 
ciety. If these are not the labors to which you allude, in 
which you say ' many concerned individuals are engaged,' 
we are entirely at a loss to understand what you mean, 
as we suppose you cannot refer to the individual acts of 
those you have proscribed on account of their labors, to 
prove the Anti-Slavery character of that portion of the 
Society wdiich now claims to be the 4 body ;' though you 
might do so with about as much propriety as to have 
quoted the Anti-Slavery proceedings of former years for 
the same purpose. 

ci With regard to the ' some ' whom you say ' have ex- 
tended their labors into the slave States,' we suppose you 
alluded to those ministers who have traveled there on 
religious visits. We have the best evidence that some of 
these labored, in part, while there, to convince the slave- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 121 

holders that they were not in unity with the Abolitionists, 
whom they (the slaveholders) hated, and whose influence 
they so much dreaded ; thus, so far as those Friends had 
any influence with the slaveholders, confirming their 
prejudices against the A. S. enterprise. 

u You say you think the proceedings of which we com- 
plain are in accordance with the usages of Society. We 
ask, when, until in the present case, has the Yearly Meet- 
ing issued advice to its members, and then taken measures 
to enforce that advice by inflicting Church censure, and 
removing from 'the stations they occupied in the Society, 
those who could not conscientiously comply with that 
advice ? We are not aware of any such measures being 
adopted in all the proceedings of the Society, until this 
time. Mere advice cannot be recognized as law, and we 
cannot recognize the authority of any body, either civil 
or religious, to impose official censure, but for the viola- 
tion of acknowledged law or discipline. We maintain 
that by the Discipline, members of the Meeting for Suffer- 
ings cannot be removed from their stations while they 
retain their right in Society, for any other cause than de- 
clining or greatly nerfectino; the attendance of the meet- 
ing. And we believe that no instance is on record in 
the Minutes of the Yearly Meeting, so far as we have 
examined them, (which is as far back as 1827.) of the 
removal of any member from the Meeting for Sufferings, 
(until disowned from the Society.) on any other account 
than request to be released, or delinquency. And if we 
are not mistaken, in all such cases the reason is given. 
We apprehend the only instance on record of a member 
being stated to be disqualified, and no cause of disquali- 
fication mentioned, is that of an individual who was dis- 
owned, and had appealed to the Yearly Meeting, and 
that meeting had confirmed the judgment of the Quar- 
terly and Monthly meetings. The report of the commit- 
tee on the appeal, together with the judgment of the 
Yearly Meeting confirming it, were published in the 
proceedings of the same meeting that appointed another 
Friend in his place, on account of Ms being ; disquali- 






122 HISTORY OF THE SEPAEATION IN 

fied.' So that there was no danger of misapprehension 
about it. 

" ' How then can it be said, w T ith any degree of fair- 
ness or truth,' that the proceedings of the Meeting for 
Sufferings and the last Yearly Meeting at White Water, 
in removing members of the Meeting for Sufferings, upon 
the vague charge of disqualification, who were among the 
most diligent attenclers of that meeting, were in accord- 
ance w T ith the usages of the Society ; when not a single 
instance of the kind can be found on record in fifteen 
years, if ever? And not only so but the act is contrary 
to the plain provision of the Discipline, relative to that 
subject. 

u Is it in accordance with the usages of the Society to 
prefer complaints against its members of such a nature 
as to be worthy of public censure, and even to cause their 
names to go to the world as offenders, without even in- 
forming them of the charge against them, or giving them 
an opportunit} 7 to answer for themselves ? Is it in ac- 
cordance with the usages of Society to refuse to place 
upon record, the alleged cause or misconduct of its 
members; for which they are censured, and to pub- 
lish that record to the world to the injury of their char- 
acters ? 

" So far from being in accordance with the former usage 
of the Society of Friends, it is slandering the former 
character of that Society to make the assertion. 

" You express your belief that 4 it has been a common 
practice in our Society to leave off from ail important 
appointments and stations in the Church, such as are out 
of unity with the body for any cause ; and all such as are 
standing against the Discipline or advices. 5 

" Permit us to inquire if you have excluded from im- 
portant appointments and stations, those who are out of 
unity with the body on the subject of the important doc- 
trines of the resurrection and the general judgment ? It 
is well known to many of us, and we think it must be 
known to you, that many who have stood, and for aught 
that appears, yet stand in direct opposition to the pro- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 123 

ceedings of the body in this matter, still occupy sta- 
tions of the greatest importance, and are among the 
most forward to condemn us for being out of unity with 
the body. 

"How is it with those who are out of unity with the 
body in regard to the boarding-school, and to the monthly 
meeting schools? ' By their fruits ye shall know them. 5 
If there be any truth in this maxim, it is evident that in 
some of the Quarterly meetings, where there is the most 
ability to maintain monthly meeting schools, there is 
very little unity with the concern of the body in this par- 
ticular, as they have no such schools among them. At 
the same time it is observable that the members of those 
meetings are among the most intolerant toward those who 
do not unite with the advice of the body on the Anti- 
Slavery question. 

u It is a notorious fact that if every Friend who is out 
of unity with the proceedings of the body for some cause, 
were left off from appointments, there would be very lew 
to appoint. And as for standing in opposition to the 
Discipline, you have yet to show us what clause of Dis- 
cipline those had violated who were rejected by the 
Yearly Meeting. 

" You undertake to give currency to the misrepresenta- 
tion which has often been made, that we were not cen- 
sured for our Abolition principles, but for insubordina- 
tion. We are astonished that you should be guilty of 
such an absurdity. Let us illustrate. In the early set- 
tlement of 2s ew England rigorous laws were made against 
the Quakers, with a view to suppress their principles and 
practices. They were banished and forbidden to return 
upon pain of death. Their principles impelled them to 
return, and some of them were hanged. According to 
your version, these persons were not hanged for their 
Quaker principles, 'as has been erroneously stated.' 
Surely that cause must be weak which has to be sup- 
ported by such arguments. 

M There is one portion of your Address which we have 
passed over, that is calculated, whether so intended or 



124 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

not, to convey the idea to those who are unacquainted 
with the circumstances, that our Society of Anti-Slavery 
Friends is confined to New Garden Quarterly meeting; 
whereas there were present at the Convention at which 
the organization took place, members from at least six 
Quarterly meetings, and we have already four organized 
Quarterly, and ten Monthly meetings. 

" You refer, in several places, to the advices given by 
the Yearly Meeting to Friends not to join in associations 
with others. 

" You particularly notice the language of the report of 
the African Committee in 183S. You say c it was deemed 
best, for reasons then given, that our members should 
abstain from mixing with associations of those not of our 
Society, for the purpose.' And what were the reasons 
then given ? By reference to the Report, we find them 
to be as follows : 

" 4 Something objectionable may have been adopted, — 
some peculiarity we deem it important to maintain, may 
have been abandoned. We deem it best, for these and 
other reasons, that our Friends abstain from mixing with 
these associations.' 

"What may have been done, seems to be a strange 
reason for abandoning a course of conduct, for the promo- 
tion of one of the greatest works for the melioration of 
the condition of suffering humanity, that ever engaged 
the hearts of philanthropists, which, it must be evident, 
has been the approved means, in the hands of an overrul- 
ing Providence, of blotting out the odious stains of Sla- 
very from a large portion of the earth, and preparing the 
way for the ushering in of a great and general Jubilee, 
when liberty shall be proclaimed throughout all the land, 
unto all the inhabitants thereof. It is one of the clearest 
propositions deducible from the history of the past, that 
the hand of Divine Providence, has been signally manifest 
in preparing the way for, and bringing about the institu- 
tion of, A. S. Societies composed of Friends and others, 
and in crowning their labors with happy results. And 
the success which continues to attend the labors of these 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 125 

mixed associations, in their endeavors to promote the 
diffusion of just and enlightened views on the subject of 
human rights, and the spread of Anti-Slavery principles 
throughout Christendom, and even in Mohamedan coun- 
tries, is of the most encouraging character. These facts, 
clear and incontrovertible as the light of history and ex- 
perience can render them, should outweigh all the argu- 
ments, and suspicions, and fears, of sectarian prejudice, 
and bigoted exclusiveness. But it is pretty evident that 
the objection to mixing with others is not the great dread 
of many of our opposers, for they manifest no repugnance 
to associating in secular matters for the promotion of 
their worldly interests with those of any, or of no reli- 
gious denomination. And what puts the matter beyond 
doubt, is the fact that when an attempt was made to form 
associations of Friends, it was objected to with as much 
earnestness as joining in associations with others. 
This v proves clearly that mixing with others was only 
the ostensible, and not the real objection with many of 
our opposers, and that there was really a feeling of hos- 
tility to our becoming in any manner identified with 
Abolitionism. 

" In your Address, you say to Friends, you do not want 
their testimony against Slavery to abate; but that you 
wish them to 'exercise the spirit and follow the prac- 
tice of John Woolman V etc. Permit us to query with 
you whether you exercise the spirit, and follow the prac- 
tice of John Woolman ? Tou know, he bore his testi- 
mony against Slavery so far as to cease to trade in, or to 
use those articles which were produced by slaves. Can 
you say this is your practice ? Why is it, we ask, that 
you have refused your assent to the investigation of this 
subject, when it has been brought before the different 
departments of Society ? Why have you refused the 
subject a place on the Yearly Meeting's Minutes, when 
regularly brought up by an inferior meeting ? Why did 
you cause the summary answers to the Queries to be 
altered from what the subordinate meetings prepared in 
relation to this subject ? Why should you have used 

6* 



126 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

your influence to prevent the circulation, among Friends, 
of the only work, that we know of, that is published in the 
world, on the subject of Free Labor? Are not all these 
things at variance with the practice of John Woolman ? 
He read and informed himself on the subject of Slavery, 
and when properly informed, he acted according to his 
light. It appears that he was not sensible of his connec- 
tion with Slavery until he read a work entitled, c A Cau- 
tion and Warning to Great Britain and her Colonies,' for, 
he says, he was then trading in rum, sugar, and molasses, 
the product of slave-labor, and had little concern about 
them. Yet when his eyes were opened to see his error, 
he abandoned this trade, and sought out occasions of be- 
nevolence on which to appropriate what he had made 
thereby ; thus contributing to the support of the cause of 
righteousness in the earth ; and, to use his own words, 
4 was the first motion toward a visit to Barbadoes.' He 
further said, 'the oppression of the slaves which I have 
seen in several journies southward, on the continent; and 
the report of their treatment in the West Indies, hath 
deeply affected me, and a care to live in the spirit of 
peace, and minister just cause of offense to none of my 
fellow creatures, hath, from time to time, livingly revived 
in my mind, and under this exercise, I have, for many 
years past, declined to gratify my palate with those 
sugars.' Now is it not the fact, that many of your tables 
are furnished with those sugars, and the course of those 
who abstain as he did, lightly esteemed ? John Wool- 
man traveled much, and labored continually through evil 
report and through good report, for the enlargement of 
his oppressed fellow creatures. 

4 Nor was he willing to have the work put off ior a 
more convenient season ; but warned the people that if 
they delayed, they might be visited with ' terrible tilings 
in righteousness,' for the omission of duty. And he fur- 
ther says, that his concern was that he ' might attend 
with singleness of heart to the voice of the true Shepherd 
of Israel, and be so supported as to remain unmoved.at the 
faces ot men, 5 etc. Nor was this concern ot his a mo- 



IMDIANA YE ABLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 12? 

mentary zeal, or fire of his own kindling, but one that 
lasted through life ; for he requested his attendants around 
his death bed, to not give him medicine which was the 
fruit of oppression, in case he should be deprived of his 
senses in his last moments. 

" We now come to the conclusion^ of the whole matter. 
A portion of the people of these United States, becom- 
ing thoroughly convinced that, in order that Slavery may 
be abolished, and our country saved from impending niin 3 
some means must be used to regenerate public senti- 
ment, and change it from a deep-rooted, unholy prejudice 
against that degraded class of human beings, who are 
now held in abject bondage by their brethren, to a spirit 
and practice of equal justice to all men, ; in the progress 
of the light of truth,' have organized A. S. Societies, and 
are actively and increasingly engaged in supporting 
them, as affording the only measures now being put in 
operation, having any direct tendency to bring about 
the desired change in the views and actions of the people 
on this subject. To the labors of the supporters of this 
enterprise many of your acts manifest an opposition. 
And here lies the whole difficulty, and here it must and 
will remain, all your pretensions to the contrary notwith- 
standing. Hence difficulties, inconsistencies, incongrui- 
ties, and contradictions have marked the line of your 
whole proceedings on this subject, and ever must, until 
you either cease to call the A. S. enterprise 'a most 
righteous cause,' 'got up in the progress of the light of 
truth,' etc., or cease to oppose it by undervaluing the 
characters of its supporters, by unchristianizing them, by 
many, various, and unmeaning charges, such as the work- 
ing of a ' spirit of activity, self-confidence, and insubor- 
dination ;' ' working in their own strength and in their 
own wills;' 'not waiting for a right opening;' acting 
in an 'overactive zeal,' etc 5 etc. 

" With desires that you may yet see your error and 
retrace your steps, we remain your friends. 

" Signed on behalf and by direction of the Meeting for 
Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery 



128 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

Friends, held at Newport, by adjournment, on the 10th 
of Fourth month, 1843. 

" Benjamin Stanton, Clerk." 



CHAPTER XIII. 

Some corroborative Remarks — Origin of the Use of the Term "Body"— 
Anonymous review of the Declaration of A, S, Friends. 

The Epistle of Advice, alluded to in the foregoing- 
Address, which was rejected by the Meeting for Sufferings 
in Sixth month, 1839, " on account," as the Address 
states, "of its hostility to Colonization," it may be pro- 
per to remark, embraced the same caution which had 
previously been given by the Yearly Meeting, against 
Friends joining in associations with others for the pro- 
motion of the Anti-Slavery cause or other benevolent 
objects, and, therefore, could not have been faulted for a 
lack on that head. Hence the evident correctness of the 
statement that it was rejected mainly on account of its 
hostility to Colonization, w T hich was a prominent feature 
in it. But this is only corroborative ; that statement was 
made from personal knowledge by eye and ear witnesses. 

In consequence of the repeated and continued asser- 
tions made by many, that unconditional submission to 
the advice of the body was the duty of members, the 
term u Body," which sometimes occurs, was used after 
the separation to refer to those w T ho hold that doctrine, 
or to Indiana Yearly Meeting. 

The Meeting for Sufferings of that body did not deign 
to make reply to the document addressed to it, which I 
have just quoted, nor did the Yearly Meeting itself ever 
attempt to answer the arguments adduced nor to dis- 
prove the positions taken in any of the various epistles, 
addresses/ or other documents of those they called 
" Seceders" and " Separatists," This feature in the 



i:\DiAKA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 129 

history of this lamentable schism cannot fail to strike the 
mind of the intelligent reader as a very significant cir- 
cumstance. Some attempt, however, at this was made 
by individuals. A pamphlet was sent forth to the world 
entitled "A Review of the Declaration of a Meeting of 
Anti-Slavery Friends," but the author, probably aware 
of its fallacy or lack of candor, and hence dreading a pub- 
lic castigation, prudently withheld his name. Here it is, 
without any date ; probably it was written in Seventh 
month, 18i3: 



REVIEW 

or the 

DECLARATION 

OF A 

MEETING OF ANTI-SLAVERY FEIENDS. 

Which assembled in the capacity of a Yearly Meeting^ 
at Newport^ Indiana, Second month 1th, 18i3, ad- 
dressed to a Friend, in answer to several inquiries 
about the Separation in the Society of Friends in Indi- 
ana Yearly Meeting. 

"After their introduction, on pages six and seven of 
their Minutes, in which they propose to organize them- 
selves into a Society of Friends, in which they may enjoy 
those religious privileges and benefits which they tell us 
they so highly prize, and ' of which (they say) we have 
been arbitrarily and unhappily deprived by the prescrip- 
tive measures of the ruling part of the Yearly Meeting, 5 
they proceed to declare, that they have not separated 
from the principles of the Society nor from its testimo- 
nies and discipline, 5 the difference in title which they 
have adopted, being merely for distinction and to express 
their adherence to the testimony of Friends against 
Slavery. 

"Remarks. — From what privilege have they been de- 
prived by the Yearly Meeting? We may suppose our 



130 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

Epistle of Advice will explain. 'Friends are advised to 
be weighty and deliberate in making appointments to 
any of the important stations or committees in Society, 
so that faithful and trusty Friends may be chosen ; as we 
believe that those w T ho have distinguished themselves by 
opposition or disregard to the advice and travail of the 
body, are manifestly unsuitable for important services in 
it, while they remain in that situation.' Some of the 
leaders in this schism had distinguished themselves by 
opposition and disregard to the advice ; and under such 
circumstance, ought they still to be promoted in the ser- 
vices of the Society, and put forward as though nothing 
was the matter ? Was such ever the course of the 
Society, in any case, since its foundation ? This is an 
important point in this separation. The Separatists being 
confessedly against the Advice and out of unity with the 
proceedings of the great body of the Society, claim still 
to do important services in it ; or as they might have said 
more distinctly and not less truly, to rule it. Their pro- 
portion in numbers, in the Yearly Meeting at large, is 
very small ; not, it is probable, at a very liberal estimate, 
over one-tenth of the members ; yet they wish to rule or 
must separate. 

"And that, so far as they had the power, they selected 
their own men, to the exclusion of others, was a subject 
of notice and remark for a considerable time before their 
separation. They proceed, pages six and seven, to state 
the ' universal liability of all associations, both civil and 
religious, to deterioration ;' the great precaution taken 
by early Friends to prevent it in our Society in this 
country, and that facts and circumstances connected with 
the Society in this country, at the present time, sorrow- 
fully demonstrate the inefficiency of all this. 

"Remarks. — The inference plainly is, that our Society 
has, in their opinion, deteriorated, that it has departed, 
little by little, from the Truth as it is in Jesus,' and that 
they, not having deteriorated, but being more holy than 
those they have left behind, make the corruption of the 
mother church one cause of their leaving it. Those in- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 181 

terested will not fail to take notice whether this is the 
state of facts. 

"They say on page seven, that 'through the unre- 
mitted labors of Woolman, Benezet, and kindred spirits. 
Friends of the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia cleared 
themselves from holding slaves,' etc., and that 'about 
this time James Pemberton, Warner Mifflin, and many 
other Friends, eminent for their piety and virtue, appre- 
hending that much advantage to the cause of the 
oppressed Africans might be derived from duly enlisting 
all classes of the community in their behalf, engaged in 
the formation of associations for that purpose.' 

u Ee?narks. — Not associations of their sort, however. 
The modern Abolition Societies took their rise as lately 
as 1832, and do not agree, in practice nor throughout in 
principle, with the worthy individuals whom they name, 
It is very apparent that the Seceders are anxious to iden- 
tify themselves, if possible, with these worthy predeces- 
sors, by claiming them as fellow-operators in the Anti- 
Slavery cause ; whereas the Society they have left hold 
and endeavor to put in practice the views of Woolman 
and others, in regard to Slavery, yet they so far differ, 
that they proceed to separate. Would it not be more 
honorable in them to take their own stand ; to assert their 
origin in 1832, and not inconsistently claim our folks 
and reject us I Some extracts from Woolman will make 
plain to any who understands the views and is acquainted 
with the acts of the Seceders, whether they hold and act 
upon his principles. Hear him. 

"'In this (Philadelphia) Yearly Meeting several 
weighty matters were considered; and toward the last, 
that in relation to dealing with persons who purchase 
slaves. 

" ' During the several sittings of the said meeting my 
mind was frequently covered with inicard prayer ; and 
I could say with David, that ' tears were my meat day 
and night.' The cause of slave-keeping lay heavy upon 
me ; nor did I find any engagement to speak directly to 
any other matter before the meeting. When this case 



182 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

was opened, several faithful Friends spoke weightily 
thereto, with which I was comforted, and feeling a con- 
cern to cast in my mite, I said, in substance, as follows: 
In the difficulties attending us in this life nothing is 
more precious than the mind of Truth inwardly mani- 
fested; and it is my earnest desire, in this weighty mat- 
ter, we may he so humbled as to he favored with a clear 
understanding of the mind of Truth and follow it ; this 
would be of more advantage to the Society than any me- 
dium not in the clearness of Divine wisdom. The case is 
difficult to some who have slaves, but if such set aside all 
self-interest, and come to be weaned from the desire of 
getting estates, or even from holding them together, when 
Truth requires the contrary, I believe the way will open that 
they will know how to steer through those difficulties. 
Many Friends appeared to be deeply howed under the 
weight of the worh^ and manifested much firmness in 
their love to the cause of Truth and universal righteous- 
ness on the earth.' 

" ' After this 1 joined with my Friends — 

in visiting Friends who had slaves, and at night we had 
a family meeting at William Trimble's, many young 
people being there, and it was a precious reviving oppor- 
tunity. 

a; Some whose hearts were rightly exercised about 
them, appeared to be glad of our visit, but in some places 
our way was more difficult ; and I often saw the necessi- 
ty of keeping down to that root, from whence our concern 
proceeded ; and have cause, in reverend thankfulness, 
humbly to bow down before the Lord, who was near me, 
and preserved my mind in calmness under some sharp 
conflicts, and begat a spirit of sympathy and tenderness 
toward some who were grievously entangled by the 
spirit of this world.' 

u After this, he says : c It was a time of deep exercise, 
looking often to the Lord for his assistance, who, in un- 
speakable kindness, favored us with the influence of that 
spirit, which crucifies to the greatness and splendor of 
this world.' 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 133 

u Another time, having no company, he says : C I went 
alone to their houses, and in the fear of the Lord, ac- 
quainted them with the exercise I was under, and thus, 
sometimes by a few words, I found myself discharged 
from a heavy burden.' — Friends' Library, vol. IV, pp. 
35i, 355, 356. 

" How different was John TYoolman's spirit ; how dif- 
ferent his example of waiting and labor, from theirs ! 

" Fage 8. ; But after much good had been effected 
through the agency of these institutions' — (not modern 
Abolition institutions it should be remembered) ' a com- 
bination of adverse circumstances conspired to change 
the current of feeling. The hand of cruel avarice became 
afresh nerved to its unholy grasp by the prospect of ex- 
tensive gain, through the facilities offered by the inven- 
tion of the cotton gin.' 

M Remarks. — Is not the whole of this an assumption 
without proof? Does it not sound like matter proceed- 
ing from an excited lecturer, who is endeavoring to make 
capital whereon to base his discourse ? The cotton gin 
is a labor-saving machine, not calculated, one would 
think, to increase, but to lessen the demand for human 
labor. 

" They proceed — 'This prospect and desire of gain 
was not confined to those immediately engaged in hold- 
ing slaves, but extended with lamentable effect to many 
of those in the Free States, inclined to enter into mercan- 
tile or manufacturing operations. This class included a 
number of the most wealthy and influential in the Society 
of Friends in the Middle and Eastern States ; and the 
consequent intercourse between them and the slavehold- 
ers of the South, had a direct tendency to leaven them 
into the same lordly, pompous, and intolerant feeling.' 

" Remarks. — Shocking picture indeed, if true. Who 
will vouch for its truth ? Let us ' beware lest any man 
spoil us through philosophy and vain deceit.' 

" ' This circumstance,' they say, s taken in connection 
with that of the formation and active operation of the 
Colonization Society, instituted mainly by slayeholders* 

7 



134 HISTOEt OF THE SEPARATION 18 

and purposely for the removal of the free people of color 
from the country, and in order that none of the des- 
pised class might enjoy LIBERTY among us, almost sealed 
the fate of genuine Anti-Slavery feeling in the Society V 

" Remains. — How melancholy the reflection that men 
professing to be guided under the influence of the religion 
of Christ, should be so far deluded as to hazard such ex- 
pressions! What a shame to our religion I What a 
handle for infidels ! 

"The Colonization Society originated with Robert 
Finley, of New Jersey ; and has always, it is said, re- 
ceived more patronage at the North than at the South. 
From the rise, many men of the best talents, of the high- 
est order of practical benevolence, and of undoubted 
piety, have taken an active interest in its success. What 
a departure from charity, what a slender upon all these 
(and such as these have always been among the leaders), 
to say that their object was the removal of the free people 
of color, in order that none of them might enjoy liberty 
among as. The Colonization Society had no power, if 
they had desired to do so, to compel free people to go to 
Africa. They go only by their ' own consent' — this is 
one of the first articles. None go that do not think best 
to go. And what harm to assist any such ! The free 
people of color are in many cases surrounded by circum- 
stances (the existence of which we may deplore, but can 
not prevent) which may induce them to think best to 
remove. Most persons in the West have removed under 
the influence of circumstances. Our forefathers came 
from England under circumstances. Africans go to Can- 
ada because they think best to do so; and the Separatists 
have, many of them, at different times, assisted such, 
even those not legally entitled to their freedom ; and yet 
to assist them in finding a refuge from their troubles, in 
Africa, in a way less objectionable, is declared in their 
publications, and intimated in this Declaration, to be a 
design to perpetuate Slavery. 

" Many benevolent men, with claims as justly founded 
as these seceders, to the credit of the most honest and 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIEHDS. 135 

devoted laborers for the good of the African race, haye 
desired to see colonies settled along the western coast of 
Africa; Thomas Fowell Buxton, and many other Eng- 
lish philanthropists, who are in favor of universal eman- 
cipation, may be named as examples. Such colonies 
form an asylum to which persons can go, who cannot be 
freed under the laws where they are ; for there are many 
owners of slaves who are convinced of the evil, and desire 
to rid their hands of it, who cannot do it where they are, 
on account of the laws. The way might also be opened 
through such colonies, for the introduction under Divine 
Providence, of civilization, commerce, the arts, and 
Christianity, among the barbarous tribes of Africa, by 
their brethren, originally of the same stock, and with 
constitutions adapted to the climate. But the Society of 
Friends, as such, has done but little for the Colonization 
Society, if we except that Friends in the Southern States 
have made use of the facilities offered by that Society, to 
set on the shores of Africa, as entirely free persons, a 
great many who could not remain in the South without 
being in slavery ; and it is presumed that all the Yearly 
Meetings have assisted them in the benevolent work, 
Some members have also occasionally contributed small 
sums, to assist such in going as desired to go. 

u 2. ^Notwithstanding the Society of Friends has been 
active for the good of the free persons of color, the great 
leading concern has been for the extinction of Slavery. 
And their labors have been active and unremitted tor 
fifty years past, or more, in the cause. What a great 
departure then, from ail Truth, must it be to declare to the 
world, that Anti-Slavery feeling has at any time within 
the last half century been almost sealed in the Society ! 
Pious, sound-hearted, cool-headed, active laborers in the 
cause, in our Society, will look upon such misrepresenta- 
tion with pain and disgust. 

u Page 9. ' In 1S82, a resuscitation of the Anti-Slavery 
cause commenced in one of the Eastern States.' 

"Remarks. — Why not say, c In 1832, the modern 
Abolitionists, to the ranks of which we belong, in 



136 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

distinction from those of Woolman, Pemberton, Ben- 
ezet, Mifflin, Franklin, and other Abolitionists of pre- 
ceding years, and of the Society of Friends at the 
present time, took their rise, and we think proper to 
shake off the yoke of church subordination, and join with 
these V The matter of fact would then have been fairly 
and honestly stated. For while some might doubt the 
propriety, none could properly deny their right to do so. 

u We pass over their other remarks on page 9, and 
those on pages 10, 11, 12, and part of 13, as containing 
nothing worthy of refutation. Suffice it to say, that the 
statements are not acknowledged, in the manner they 
make them ; their spirit and bearing being particularly 
objectionable, and most of the facts brought to view be- 
ing unfairly represented. 

u On page 13, they say: 'One branch of the' (Afri- 
can) ' Committee forwarded a report to its general meet- 
ing,' in 1841, ' treating the subject (of the consumption 
of the proceeds of Slavery) at some length, showing the 
impropriety and inconsistency of Friends sustaining a 
market for such productions. But when it was read in 
that body, it was spurned, it was rejected, with manifest 
bitterness and contempt,' etc. 

" Remarks. — That is one version of the story, showing 
an example of the manner in which they relate a history 
of the past. The following is the true one. The New 
Garden branch of the African Committee was at that 
time under the influence and control of persons who have 
since seceded. They prepared and sent up to the Gen- 
eral Committee, a long essay on the subject of Free and 
Slave labor produce. When this was brought before the 
committee, they had strong doubts of the propriety of 
having it read, or descending into the consideration of 
the subject, in that capacity ; inasmuch as it w T as alto- 
gether foreign to the business of their appointment; and 
as the subject was one with which Friends were already 
acquainted. The duties of this committee are thus set 
out in the Minute of their appointment: 'They are 
charged with attending to the assistance and protection 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 137 

of the people of color, and desired to endeavor to promote 
their education, and moral and religious improvement of 
those within our limits, with a view to their elevation to 
the rank and rights of freemen.' 

" But the disaffected members of the committee show- 
ing so strong a desire to have the document read, the 
committee at length yielded, in condescension ; entirely 
to satisfy and gratify them, to take the time to hear it. 
It was then read, and turned out to be an essay of like 
character with others of their productions, containing 
some things true, and some mixed, or at least liable to 
objections. After the reading, it was remarked in sub- 
stance about as follows : ' That this was a subject foreign 
to the business of this committee, and therefore not 
proper to be presented, or discussed by it ; that Friends 
now all had the right, and entire undoubted privilege to 
exercise, freely, their own conscience in abstaining from 
anything they saw fit on conscientious ground ; a right 
and privilege which we would be far from abridging; 
but that we objected to the consideration of the subject in 
this committee until it should be laid upon us as a part 
of our business ; or to its being made a matter of disci- 
pline ; — it being entirely a matter of conscience.' To 
these views the main part of the committee responded, 
and were ready to respond, but the self-active spirits of 
some of the disaffected members were so uneasy at the 
expression of these remarks and under this way of leaving 
the subject, that, although Friends had in condescension 
suffered their document to be read, they could scarcely be 
restrained to let the committee rise in good order; as 
some of our Friends from a distance will bear us witness. 

"It should be observed that in some few meetings, 
where the influence of the disaffected members prevailed, 
they had been introducing into the Answers to the Queries, 
complaints that Friends did not bear a testimony against 
Slavery, predicated upon the use of articles supposed to 
have been produced in slave countries. 

" On page 14, they come again upon the American 
Colonization Society, as if the members of Indiana Yearly 



138 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

Meeting were largely engaged in Colonization, or as 
members and contributors to that society ; neither of 
which is the fact. There are very few Friends, if any, 
belonging to the Yearly Meeting, who are members of 
that society, and the contributions to its funds from 
Friends here must have been very small. A small sum, 
from one to three dollars, handed by a single individual, 
and that to assist some colored persons in Tennessee, is 
all that the seceders have been able to discover in the 
way of recent contributions, and they have trumpeted 
that from one part of the land to the other as a mighty 
transgression. That contribution was not made, how- 
ever, contrary to any Advice of the Yearly Meeting, 
either in spirit or letter ; for our Meeting for Sufferings 
itself, once caused near $1,000 to be contributed for pre- 
cisely the same object, viz : to assist friends in North 
Carolina, in helping persons of color to remove to Africa 
and elsewhere. The Advice of the Ye-arly Meeting was 
against participating in the work of 6 expatriation,' by 
which it was undoubtedly meant, forcible removal, with- 
out consent ; for this Advice was given very soon after 
Friends of Indiana had assisted Friends of North Caro- 
lina, as before mentioned, which is sufficient evidence 
that voluntary removal was not opposed in the Advice. 
If voluntary removal is what was intended by ; expatria- 
tion, 5 every active member may probably be guilty of 
transgression in some way or other; and if such an in- 
terpretation be admitted, Friends could be prevented from 
assisting people of color at all, in their removals, and 
which none are more guilty in than many of the leading 
seceders, who are almost continually, if not systematic- 
ally, engaged in aiding them to escape to Canada. The 
fact is, Friends in Indiana have taken very little part in 
any way, in Colonization ; their feelings have been 
mainly enlisted and directed toward amelioration and 
general emancipation. 

" The meeting therefore acted very consistently and 
properly in passing over the remarks made by one of the 
leading seceders, about rescinding the 6 Colonization 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 139 

scheme,' and by immediately progressing on with its 
business. 

"Page 14. 'Henry Clay, the great champion of the 
Pro-Slavery, Whig part}', and intended candidate for the 
ensuing Presidency of the United States — the President 
of the American Colonization Society, the slaveholder 
and duelist, while on an electioneering tour to the State 
of Indiana, attended a political meeting at Richmond, at 
the time of Yearly Meeting (1842) ; word being given 
out that it was his intention to attend the public Meeting 
of Friends on First-day. 

" Remarks. — Who gave out such word, and where was 
it given out ? 

u Page 15. ' His meeting was held on the day imme- 
diately preceding this, at which time a petition was pre- 
sented to him, with near two thousand signatures ap- 
pended, requesting him to give liberty to those of his 
fellow-beings whom he had long deprived of their just 
rights.' 

u Remarks. — It is well known that this petition was 
got up merely for effect. It is said that it was signed by 
men, women, children, and persons of color; and that 
many of Henry Clay's political enemies signed it, who 
probably cared nothing about Abolitionism, but liked 
well enough to do something that would gall him. The 
manner of its presentation was very reprehensible. He 
was attached with it, in the midst of a vast concourse of 
many thousands of his political friends, while on a visit 
to them, at their special invitation — and upon the public 
stand whither he had gone to address them. The petition 
was presented by a person appearing to be a member of 
our religious Society. Does any one think that if the 
signers of this petition had been actuated by the sincere 
love of the Gospel of Christ in the measure, and under a 
sense of duty, and with any hope of making a favorable 
impression on the mind of Henry Clay, they would have 
taken this course for it ? Would they not have been more 
likely to send the petition to him at his home at Ashland, 
where he could have received and considered it coolly and 



140 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

calmly, aside from political bustles and political enemies ? 
or to have presented it, by a respectful delegation, in his 
private room at Richmond ? Such a course might have 
been well approved. Such a one might have had a good 
effect upon his mind. How much is it to be regretted 
that these people, in a good cause, should act with such 
misguided zeal. 

"Page 15. 'After this, a few Friends, in behalf of 
those who desired to ' retain their place and influence,' 
took an opportunity to inform him that the Society (of 
Friends) had no hand in getting up this petition,' etc. 

" Remarks. — Very proper information ; and such as 
was due to Henry Clay, and the Society of Friends, more 
particularly as the petition had been presented by a per- 
son who had been taken for a Friend. But the Friends 
who gave Henry Clay this correct information, did it on 
behalt of themselves, and are personally responsible for 
all they said ; they were not delegated. 

" Page 15. ' The Clerk of the meeting, on First-day 
morning, took him in his carriage to meeting ; Friends 
took care to seat him in one of the most conspicuous 
places in the house.' 

" Remarks. — What was there wrong in this ? A dis- 
tinguished stranger visits our neighborhood on meeting 
day; he tells a member whom he meets, that he is in- 
clined to go to our meeting. Shall we do less than show 
him the way \ and to find him a seat when he gets there ? 
"Would it not be a great and reprehensible violation of all 
good manners, courtesy, good breeding, and duty to dis- 
respect such an intimation ? Henry Clay is distinguished 
as an eminent politician and statesman, as a man of su- 
perior talents, and he has long filled one of the highest 
offices in the government. And what was done for him, 
was done in accordance with well-defined duties in reli- 
gious and civil society, and done in as simple a manner, 
and with great caution to make as little parade and as 
little disturbance as possible, and we are glad to learn 
that Friends were generally well satisfied with what took 
place. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FBIENDS. 141 

"We are riot without feelings of gratitude to our 
heavenly Father, that He favored us to get along with so 
much quietness on the occasion of such a visit at so large 
a meeting. But the Clerk of the meeting, as such, did 
not conduct Henry Clay. The meeting had no Clerk on 
that day, it being a public general meeting, for worship. 
The individual who conducted him to meeting, did it upon 
his own personal responsibility, and not as the Clerk, 
and he must bear that responsibility. It need not, then, 
have been any cause for separation from the Society, as 
neither the Society nor the meeting was at all responsible 
for Henrv Clav'S presence, or the manner of his traveling 
to meeting. 

" Fage 15. ' After the close of the meeting, men and 
women, Ministers and Elders, gathered around him in the 
ministers' s;aller\\ aivino- the strongest evidence bv their 
introductions and salutations, of the high estimation in 
which they held him ; he in turn taking care to return 
the compliment with all the etiquette for w r hich he is 
famed/ 

u Remarlcs. — This is overstrained. iSTo such remark- 
able demonstrations were made, as would appear from 
their representation. The person who writes this was on 
the spot, an eye-witness ; the writer of the Declaration, as 
is supposed, and a great part of his leading friends, as is 
known, were not at meeting — being at Kewport on that 
day. An aged, infirm Friend, and worthy minister, who 
had received kindness from Henry Clay when in severe 
bodily affliction, among strangers, at Lexington, Ivy., in- 
troduced him in a becoming manner to his wife, and to a 
few other Friends near, but nothing worthy of any par- 
ticular remark occurred, and some who were among the 
disaffected seemed as anxious to see Henry Clay as any 
others were.* 

*It may be proper here to remark, that a contemptible tale has been 
widely circulated, that sundry women Friends kissed Henry Clay at the 
meeting ; and it is believed that origin and currency to this tale has 
been given mainly by the seceders, as other persons would not be likely 
to trouble themselves about it. Such a tale would indeed be unworthy 
of notice and contradiction if it had not been considered of sufficient im- 



14:2 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

" They proceed on the same page to say : ' At the time 
of Yearly Meeting, in 1S41, Charles C. Burleigh, an em- 
inent philanthropist, came to Richmond, on a mission to 
plead the cause of equal and impartial justice — to plead 
the cause of millions of our innocent suffering brethren 
and sisters in bonds, who are not permitted to plead for 
themselves.' 

u Remark* — A great flourish this, whea the words c an 
Abolition lecturer/ would have expressed the whole af- 
fair. 

"Page 16. ; But this man was treated with indignity 
— with utter contempt.' 

"Remarks. — Not by Friends, however, as is insinua- 
ted. If they do not mean to say that Friends treated him 
contemptibly, why do they state it as a cause of separa- 
tion ? But hear them further. 

uc Friends closed their meeting-house doors against 
him, the doors of the public houses in the town were 
closed also, and he was mobbed in the open street while 
addressing the people.' 

"Remarks. — This is also overstrained, false in insinu- 
ation, and unsound in facts. What business would C. 0. 
Burleigh have had in our meeting-house in Yearly Meet- 
ing time, not being a member, except to attend a meeting 
for worship ? This he had the most unqualified liberty to do. 
There were few Friends in attendance, who would not 
have offered him their own seat, if they had known him, 
and if it had been necessary to do so in order for him to 
be seated. 1 presume very few persons, except those 
who have since seceded, were aware of his presence at 
meeting. No application was made to the Trustees, in 
his behalf, for the use of the house, to appoint a meeting ; 
hence it must be incorrect to say that the doors were 
closed against him, even though they know that Friends 

portance for them to talk over, for the ridicule of our Society. Sufficient 
be it to say, that no such thing occurred. 

Several slanderous articles have appeared in their publications insin- 
uating that extraordinary attention was paid to Henry Clay, because he 
is a slaveholder, etc., etc., an insinuation no less disgusting than corrupt 
and unfounded. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 143 

are not in the practice of opening their meeting-houses 
for the lectures of strangers. If the doors of the public 
houses in town were not open to him, it was because the 
houses Jiad been previously filled, as is frequently the 
case in time of Yearly Meeting. If they have reference 
to the meeting-houses of any other religious professors, 
it is not necessary that we should answer for them — we 
know nothing about it — they can answer for themselves. 
The insinuation that Friends mobbed him in the street, 
is detestable. It may be safely asserted, that very few, 
if any persons of character can be found in Richmond, 
leaving Friends out of the question, who would not most 
decidedly disapprove of all mobbing. Isot one could 
have been concerned in the reported mob, except bad 
boys and persons of low character, and probably very 
few of either. 

" Page 16. ' Thus it is evident, so far as an extensive 
tissue of facts and circumstances can establish, and so 
far as the fruit of a tree can manifest its character, that 
the influence by which the Yearly Meeting is now gov- 
erned is PRO-SLAVERY, and that unsoundness lies at 
the bottom of the opposition with which we have been 
assailed. 5 

"Remarks. — It is only by a strong exercise of chari- 
table feeling that we can be brought to think that the 
sentiment, expressed in this paragraph, is not willfully 
erroneous. Examples have, however, before occurred, in 
which, under the gloom of a thick cloud of delusion, 
men have taken darkness for light and light for darkness, 
and persuaded themselves to believe, through excite- 
ments and reasonings of their own getting up, that to be 
true which was altogether untrue. If delusion has so 
unhappily clouded the minds of these people as to cause 
them to imagine that the Society of Friends is in favor 
of Slavery, it is pretty certain that it does not extend 
itself beyond their influence ; as the public, and parti- 
cularly the slaveholders in the slave States, are well 
aware that Friends have long since cleared their hands 
of this evil on conscientious ground, and that they are 



144 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

decidedly and firmly against slavery, in every country 
where they are found. 

" If some of the leading seceders should turn their 
attention to themselves and seek a qualification to see, 
in the light of Truth, whether a disposition has not been 
growing upon them, for years, to govern our Yearly 
Meeting in their own way, and whether, when this dis- 
position was fairly discovered and checked, they pos- 
sessed the meekness and humility to submit to their 
brethren, or whether they took offense and flew off, they 
might probably be favored to discover a reason, better 
justified by truth than the foregoing, why they met with 
opposition in their course. 

"But hear them through the paragraph: 'Various, 
however, are the grounds of this opposition with diffe- 
rent individuals, and much too complicated to be fully 
described in our limits. 

" c But that which we doubt not is occupied by the 
greater number is plainly alluded to in the following 
extract from the Epistle of Advice of 1841 ; • Thus main- 
taining our peaceable and Christian principles in un- 
broken harmony, we shall, we believe, be enabled, as 
way may open, more availingly to plead the cause of this 
much injured race of our fellow-men, and retain the place 
and influence which, as a Society, we have heretofore 
had with the rulers of the land.' 

"HemarJcs. — And why should we not wish to retain a 
place in the hearts of those we desire to influence for 
good ? If the truth is to be declared to one that has 
departed from the right way, will it not be most effectu- 
ally done in the spirit of kindness, in accordance with 
4 our peaceable and Christian principles ? or shall we, if 
we wish to convince and gain one to whom we speak, 
approach him by calling him a thief, a liar, or a mur- 
derer, as the case may be ? 

" The insinuation," on page 17, that by being thus 
mild, and acting up to the advice they quote, Friends 
are ' yielding to the prejudices, or accommodating our- 
selves to the corrupt views and sentiments of those 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. Ii5 

around us,' in regard to Slavery, comes without any sub- 
stantial proof, and is believed to be groundless. 

"They proceed, on the same page, to notice the case 
of the eight members of the Meeting for Sufferings, who 
were reported by that meeting to the Yearly Meeting as 
having lost their usefulness in the first-named body. As 
those eight members are among the principal leaders in 
the schism, and the declaration w T as probably drawn up 
by them, a sense of modesty, one would have thought, 
ought to have prevented their making this circumstance 
public. We should also think that any person of calm 
mind, who knows what their proceedings have been since 
that report, could not for a moment doubt the justice of 
the measure. The Meeting for Sufferings is a delegated 
body, acting under appointment, like a committee, to do 
important business, in behalf of the Society, in the inte- 
rim of the regular sessions of the Yearly Meeting. It 
would indeed be strange doctrine to presume that the 
Yearly Meeting has not power to see that it is fairly re- 
presented by this body, which is appointed by itself for 
the special purpose of representing it ; and that the 
Yearly Meeting has not power to examine, dismiss, and 
appoint others, until it shall be fairly represented. And 
it has been a general rule in our Meeting for Sufferings, 
which the Yearly Meeting has always recognized, that 
the former, standing, as it does, to watch the interests of 
the Society, has the liberty to make any suggestion or 
proposition to the latter which the slate of society may 
require or which may be thought proper. Xow here are 
certain members of the Meeting for Sufferings who do 
not represent the Yearly Meeting ; who are counteract- 
ing and opposing its Advices ; who are so alienated in 
their feelings that they are taking open and active mea- 
sures directly at variance with the wishes of the meeting 
they represent. It would be great anarchy if they must 
be allowed to pursue their career interminably. They 
are talked to kindly, again and again ; they are per- 
suaded ; they are admonished by their own personal and 
intimate friends, and by divers valuable Friends, eminent 






146 HISTORY OF THE SEPAEATION IH 

for their piety, traveling from other States and countries 
for the spread of the Gospel through our land, but all to 
no effect. They know too much. They refuse to be per- 
suaded. They refuse to change. And what could the 
Meeting for Sufferings do less, with the knowledge of 
these facts before it, than to make the suggestion to the 
Yearly Meeting that they had lost their usefulness. The 
Yearly Meeting would then be at liberty to act in the 
case as it might see proper. It was nothing like disown- 
ment, nor did it contain or contemplate any preparatory 
Steps for it. But previously to making this suggestion, 
a large committee was appointed in the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings, who considered the matter weightily ; and when 
they exposed the names of the eight members alluded to, 
a deep feeling pervaded the meeting, and almost every 
person in the meeting, excepting the ones named, wept 
freely — while the conviction of the propriety and neces- 
sity of the course was so strong that a very general 
expression of unity with the proceedings was made, 
under feelings of deep solemnity and sorrow. 

" We are informed that the seceders were consulting, 
between this time and the time when the suggestion 
should reach the Yearly Meeting, concerning measures 
for defense and for the defeat of any proposition which 
might be made in reference to their leaders. So^ it is 
easy to see why the proposition was made in the Yearly 
Meeting by one of them, that the Minutes should state 
the cause of their disqualification. The object of that 
proposition was well understood by the greater part of 
the meeting, as soon as made. It is believed that there 
are very few members of the Yearly Meeting who are in 
the practice of taking an active part in its business, who 
did not readily see that the proposition was of a political 
nature, designed entirely to create difficulty by throwing 
out this plausible defense, which should be at once 
seconded by their own party. Hence the reason is plain 
why the meeting passed on without granting a request 
so unprecedented. 

There are yet two or three pages of the Declaration 



iKDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIEKDS, li? 

which contain no matter which will claim attention at 
this time, further than a few general remarks. We can- 
not now call up in review every objectionable sentence 
and expression. The whole document is written in a 
spirit so evidently bad toward our religious society, that 
most impartial readers will readily see and feel it. And 
it might be added, that the whole is written under such 
perversions of thought, that most of the matters brought 
to view are unfairly or incorrectly represented, or shown 
out under false colors. It, therefore, would require more 
time to descend into minute explanations, refutations, 
and defense, and extend this review to a greater length 
than can be profitably appropriated to it, without being 
wearisome, or than was contemplated when the pen was 
taken up. 

"In reading this declaration and other publications of 
the seceders, we seem to arrive at the following conclu- 
sions, which may be thus stated: 

" 1. That a spirit of self-confidence and independence 
is entertained by the seceders, and a determination, on 
their part, not to submit to the church government and 
discipline. 

u 2. They make a general and, in many cases, unex- 
plained charge of Colonization against the Society, not 
only in the West, but elsewhere throughout America. 
This charge contains a slander, because w 7 hen explained 
out in words, they interpret it to be a disposition to drive 
from the country, without their consent, the people of 
color generally, on account of an unjust estimation or 
disregard of their rights, on account of unmerited preju- 
dices against them, and for the purpose of perpetuating 
Slavery, etc. Such a charge against our Society is be- 
lieved to be insupportable, and the causes of it to exist 
merely in the imagination, without reality. An exten- 
sive knowledge of the state of feeling in our Yearly 
Meeting convinces us that the great body of active mem- 
bers in Society hold no views of Colonization except such 
as are just, humane, and philanthropic, and in accord- 



14:8 KISTOBY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

ance with unconditional emancipation. Colonization is 
not relied upon to extinguish Slavery. 

" 3. They charge that a widely extended prejudice is 
entertained against the African race on account of their 
color, degradation, etc., which they say, operates against 
their enlargement, and extends itself through the Society 
of Friends. It will be time enough to defend ourselves 
against this charge when proof of guilt is made. There 
may be too much prejudice among us ; if there is, we 
have reason to hope and believe that there is a disposi- 
tion to be corrected, when convinced, and to endeavor to 
come to the right standard. 

" 4. They place the existence of a predominant Pro- 
Slavery feeling in the Society, which, they say, shows 
itself in a desire to be popular with the slaveholder, etc. ; 
a charge which may safely be considered slanderous, and 
rejected as unworthy of refutation. 

" It should be remarked, in the close, that the religious 
Society of Friends, in this country, has nothing to do 
with the modern Anti-Slavery societies, or with the 
Colonization, for good or for evil. We have once said, 
in an Epistle, that we ' wish to say nothing to discourage 
any Christian effort in the cause of freedom, by the first 
of these, nor to call in question the benevolent motives 
which influence many who are engaged in the last. Our 
desires and prayers are, that the Lord, in his mercy, may 
overrule the whole for good.' The same views and feel- 
ings are still entertained. 

"And for the seceders themselves, we earnestly desire 
forgiveness for all their errors, mistakes, and irregulari- 
ties : and that through Divine favor, they may be enabled 
to return into a state of calmness, repentance, and fellow- 
ship with their brethren; which, we think, would greatly 
contribute to their own happiness and be calculated to 
give furtherance, more effectually, to the good cause in 
which they profess to be engaged." 

As this anonymous author endeavors to make the im- 
pression, that a certain " report," alluded to in the 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 149 

Declaration as coming from a branch of the committee 
on the concerns of the People of Color, contained objec- 
tionable matter, and that which was not strictly true, the 
reader may find it by turning to page 54, and by a re- 
examination (if he has already read it) be the better pre* 
pared to judge of the propriety of the statement. 



CHAPTEE XIV. 

Defense against the Attacks of an anonymous Reviewer. 

The charges and misrepresentations of this nameless 
author were met by the Meeting for Sufferings of the 
newly-organized body, in the following manner; 



DEFENSE 

OF 

AKTI-SLAVERY FRIENDS, 

AGAINST THE SLANDEROUS ATTACKS OF AN ANONYMOUS REVLETVXR. 

Issued by a Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting of A. S. Friends, held at Newport, in Wayne 
Co., Indiana, on the 25th of Eleventh month, 1843. 

" A document, purporting to be a Keview of the De- 
claration issued by our Yearly Meeting, in the Second 
month last, having been published and widely circulated, 
containing much that is erroneous, and intended to make 
an unfavorable impression on the public mind, and par- 
ticularly on the minds of distant Friends, respecting the 
character and proceedings of A. S. Friends, we believe 
it to be our duty to say something in our own defense, 
and in defense of the cause of Truth, against the false 



150 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

charges and dark insinuations, as well as to expose 
some of the erroneous principles contained in the Re- 
view. 5 

" If the Review had been written by an obscure indi- 
vidual, and had not received the sanction of the most 
active and prominent members of the Yearly Meeting, 
by giving it a general circulation as an approved work, 
we should not have felt ourselves under the same obliga- 
tion to notice it. But as it is, being written (as is gener- 
ally believed, and we have never heard of its being de- 
nied) by the individual who has long filled the most im- 
portant station in the Yearly Meeting, and who has been 
re-appointed to that station since its publication ; and 
being approved by the leading influences, both in the 
Yearly Meeting and Meeting for Sufferings, we have to 
regard it as entitled to the same respect or censure, as if 
it had been issued by the Meeting for Sufferings. All it 
lacks is the mere formality of reading in that meeting, 
and the signature of its Clerk, and this was most probably 
omitted, in order to avoid the responsibility, in case its 
errors should be exposed. And as the Yearly Meeting 
in 1841, censured members of Society for publishing an 
address to Friends, written by Joseph Sturge, because it 
was not approved by a Meeting for Sufferings ; so, in the 
case before us, the writer of the review is a violator of 
discipline, according to their own doctrine. And if it is 
wrong to publish such a document over the author's 
name, is it less wrong to publish it without a name ! If 
the author of the Review had affixed his name to his pro- 
duction, he would have been liable to the public censure 
of the Yearly Meeting. But as he has withheld it from 
the public, although he is known by the leading members 
to have committed the censurable act, he is still promoted 
to the highest place in the Society. But whether the 
author was known or not, if it be contrary to discipline 
(as our opposers say it is) to publish anything of the 
kind without the approbation of the Meeting for Suffer- 
ings, it is very inconsistent for leading characters in So- 
ciety to give it their sanction by circulating it. 



INDIANA TEAELY MEETING OF FRIENDS, 151 

" The author of the work and all who aid in its publi- 
cation and circulation are equally guilty. Take an illns* 
tration. Theft is a crime punishable by the civil law. 
It', however, a thief is crafty enough to escape detection, 
he escapes the penalty, but is he less guilty ? And if 
the administrators of the law know who the thief is, 
share in the plunder, and promote the thief to places of 
trust, are they not all alike guilty? We have not. and 
do not now. condemn individuals for publishing their 
views (under certain circumstances) on any moral or re- 
ligious question, but our opposers have brought them- 
selves into the present dilemma, by maintaining this doe- 
trine when it seems to suit their purpose, and violating 
it when circumstances appeared to render it expedient ; 
and they have attempted to evade the penalty of the law 
(according to their own construction) by concealment. 

" The Query, ; From what privileges have they been 
deprived by the Yearly Meeting?- needs no other reply 
than a reference to documents already before the public, 
and we have no doubt but all unprejudiced persons who 
are acquainted with the history of the past, in reference 
to this subject, will consider this question in no other 
light than as an insult to us, and to the good sense of the 
community. We were deprived of every privilege of 
Society except bare membership, and we know, whatever 
may now be said to the contrary, that measures were in 
train calculated to deprive us of that. Perhaps we ought 
to have made one other exception . While we were deprived 
of the privilege of exerting any influence in the disposi- 
tion of the affairs of the Society, while we were denied 
the privilege of discharging those duties which we be- 
lieved to be required of us, and our liberty of conscience 
denied us, we were still allowed the privilege of paying 
as much as we pleased, toward defraying the expenses of 
Society, 

" The assertion, more than once made, that we wished 
to rule the Yearly Meeting, is without foundation in 
truth, and must proceed from a mind grossly perverted 
by prejudice, or influenced by a malicious design to de- 



153 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

stroy our character, by misrepresentation and falsehood. 
So far were we from wishing to rule the Yearly Meeting, 
we stood entirely on the defensive. So far were we from 
attempting to drive other Friends into our measures and 
practices, we only asked for liberty to discharge our duty 
to the slave, according to the dictates of our consciences. 
We did not wish to compel or require others to join A. 
S. Societies, to attend A. S. Meetings, to deliver A. S. 
Lectures, or to read A. S. papers and publications; but 
we plead for liberty to do any or all of those things our- 
selves, as we believed them to be our duty, and this 
liberty was denied us. And for the exercise of these du- 
ties which we conscientiously believed to be required of 
us, we have been persecuted and proscribed, and driven 
to the necessity of seceding from the - body,' in order to 
enjoy our rights in peace. 

" The assertion, that, so far as we had power, we 
selected our own men to the exclusion of others, is equally 
untrue and unfounded. On the contrary, we know that 
Anti-Slavery Friends, when they took the liberty to name 
Friends on committees, very frequently named those 
who were opposed to our Anti-Slavery labors, or as they 
are commonly called c body members.' But if the charge 
were true, we know it was the course pursued by our op* 
posers, and directed by the Yearly Meeting to be prac- 
ticed. Why should they condemn us for that which they 
were guilty of themselves. 

a The remarks about the deterioration of the Society 
of Friends are remarkable. Will the writer say that it 
has not deteriorated ? And did we say, that we had not 
deteriorated from the ancient purity of the Society, or 
that we were more holy than those we have left behind ? 
Then why the self-important conclusion, that ' those in- 
terested will not fail to take notice whether this is the 
state of facts V 

" We wish to be a little particular with regard to the 
remarks of the reviewer, on the A. S. and Colonization 
societies, as here is an important point in the controversy. 
It has frequently been asserted by A. S. Friends, that 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETlKG OF FKIEKDS. 153 

our opposers were not so much influenced by opposition 
to uniting with other people in benevolent enterprises, as 
by hostility to the present Anti-Slavery societies, or to 
what is termed modern Abolition ; and that they, or at 
least, many of the leaders, were favorable to the Ameri- 
can Colonization Society. These charges have been 
denied by many individuals, and represented as un- 
founded and slanderous. But surely they cannot be dis- 
puted any longer. After such sentiments as are contained 
in the Review have been put forth by such an individual^ 
and received the sanction of the leading members — of 
those whose influence pervades and regulates all the 
transactions of the Society, it cannot be denied that they 
are the sentiments of the ruling part of the Yearly Meet- 
ing. To prove their opposition to the present A. S. so- 
cieties it is only necessary to quote a sentence or two 
from the Review. After quoting from our Declaration an 
expression made use of by us to show that Friends were 
formerly in favor of mixed associations to promote the 
abolition of Slavery, stating that 4 James Pemberton, 
"Warner Mifflin, and many other Friends, eminent for 
their piety and virtue, apprehending that much advan- 
tage to the cause of the oppressed Africans might be de- 
rived from duly enlisting all classes of the community in 
their behalf, engaged in the formation of associations for 
that purpose,' the writer of the Review says: ; Not asso- 
ciations of their sort however. The modern Abolition 
societies took their rise as lately as 1832, and do not 
agree in practice, nor throughout in principle, with the 
worthy individuals whom they name.' Now, is it not 
plain that the objection really is to the modern A. S. 
societies, and not to uniting with other people? The 
argument is plainly this: 'Those worthy individuals' 
did right in uniting with others, because the principles 
of the societies they formed were sound, and their prac- 
tices correct. But it is not right for Friends to join 
modern A. S. societies, because their practice is errone- 
ous and their principles unsound. If this is not the 
import of the expression, it means nothing, For surely 



154 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

it does not touch the question, of the propriety or 
impropriety of uniting with others for the promotion 
of a good work, except to sanction it by claiming those 
who are known to haye practiced it, as their people. 

" As an additional evidence of hostility to the present 
Anti-Slavery associations, hear him again. Quoting 
from the Declaration, where we were speaking of the 
good that had been effected by the A. S. institutions 
which Pemberton and other Friends were instrumental 
in establishing, the writer of the Review throws in a 
parenthetic sentence, thus : ( i not modern Abolition insti- 
tutions it should be remembered 5 ). Seeing then, that 
according to their own showing, they have no objection 
to joining A. S. societies, if they be of the right kind, 
why have they not shown wherein the modern differ from 
the ancient, so as to render them objectionable? If, in- 
stead of condemning the practice of joining benevolent 
associations altogether, the objection had only been made 
to joining those that were established upon wrong prin- 
ciples, and that pursued wrong practices, and had those 
erroneous principles and practices been pointed out, we 
might have been led to establish others that would be 
free from these objections. 

u We think we have now shown conclusively that the 
writer of the Review, and all who have given it their 
sanction, are not opposed to joining in mixed associa- 
tions, the objects and principles of which they approve 9 
but that they are opposed to the modern A. S. enterprise. 
We are ready to admit and believe that this opposition 
is occasioned more by the unpopularity of the cause, 
than by any settled hostility to its principles; yet as 
they make an objection to its principles and practices, let 
us inquire wherein the modern Anti-Slavery societies 
differ from those in the days of Mifflin, Pemberton, etc., 
in order that we may discover the objectionable feature 
in the modern, as the reviewer has not pointed it out 
to us. 

u As regards practice, we are not able to point out any 
material difference, and as the reviewer has not shown 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 155 

any, we shall take it for granted that there is none, and 
inquire what is the difference in principle \ And here 
we know of no difference except in one point. The old 
societies advocated gradual emancipation — the new. 
advocate immediatism. The old said, cease sinning by 
degrees — the new says, leave it off immediately. It is 
then the doctrine of immediate, as distinguished from 
gradual emancipation that renders the modern A. S. 
societies obnoxious to the displeasure of our reviewer 
and his adherents. 

" It seems scarcely necessary to say anything to prove 
their attachment to the Colonization scheme, after the 
labored defense* thereof by the reviewer. The most in- 
credulous must be convinced that they hold the Coloniza- 
tion Society in much more favor than the A. S. Society. 
The former is praised and defended, while the latter is 
treated with contempt, and represented as unworthy of 
the patronage of such men as Mifflin, Pemberton, etc. 
The defense of the Colonization Society seems to have 
been the most prominent object in the reviewers mind, 
as we believe he has devoted a greater space to it than to 
any other topic embraced in the Review. 

u It will be proper, we apprehend, to notice some of 
his assertions on this head, and to see how they will 
compare with facts. He quotes from our Declaration as 
follows : 

" ; This circumstance, taken in connection with that of 
the formation and active operation of the Colonization 
Society, instituted mainly by slaveholders and purposely 
for the removal of the * free people of color ' from the 
country, and in order that none of the despised class 
might enjoy liberty among us. almost sealed the fate of 
genuine Anti-Slavery feeling in the Society/ And then 
says: 

wi ; How melancholy the reflection that men professing 
to be guided under the influence of the religion of 
Christ, should be so far deluded as to hazard such ex- 
pressions ! what a shame to our religion! what a handle 
for infidels v 



156 tllSTOBY OF THS SEPARATION IK 

" What are the expressions so notoriously bad, the bare 
Utterance of which is cause of such melancholy reflec- 
tions? We are assured by what follows that the expres- 
sion respecting the institution of the Colonization Society 
is particularly obnoxious to his indignation ; for he imme- 
diately enters into a defense of that institution, commen- 
cing thus : c The Colonization Society originated with 
Robert Finley, of New Jersey, and has always, it is said,, 
received more patronage at the North than at the South. 
From the rise, many men of the best talents, of the high- 
est order of practical benevolence, and of undoubted 
piety, have always taken an active interest in its success,' 
What a departure from charity, what a slander upon all 
these (and such as these have always been among the 
leaders), to say that their object was the removal of the 
free people of color in order that none of them might 
enjoy liberty among us* If it be slander to tell the truth, 
then the language of our Declaration is slanderous. We 
asserted that the Colonization Society was instituted 
mainly by slaveholders, and purposely for the removal 
of the free people of color from the country, in order that 
none of the despised class might enjoy liberty among us. 
That this statement is true, is susceptible of the strongest 
evidence from the documents furnished by Colonization* 
ists themselves. That the Colonization Society was in- 
stituted mainly by slaveholders, is a fact too notorious 
to need confirmation, is evident to all who are acquainted 
with its orign, and it is difficult for us to believe that the 
writer of the Review did not know it. But for the sake 
of those who may not be acquainted with its history, we 
will state some of the particulars. With whom the idea 
of colonizing the free people of color on the coast of 
Africa originated, is nothing to the purpose, if it could 
be ascertained, and we presume it is unknown to any 
person living. The institution of the society is the mat- 
ter under consideration.' 5 

" On the 23d of Twelfth month, 1816, the Legislature 
of Virginia, passed a resolution, requesting the governor 
to correspond with the President of the United States, for 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 157 



the purpose of obtaining a territory on the coast of Africa, 
or at some other place not within the limits of any of 
the States, or Territorial Governments of the United 
States, to serve as an asylum for such persons of color 
as are now free, and may desire the same, and for those 
who may hereafter be emancipated within this Common- 
wealth. 

&i Xear the same time a meeting was held at Washing- 
ton, to consider this same subject. . William Jay, in his 
4 Inquiry,' says : ' It was composed almost entirely of 
Southern gentlemen ; Judge Washington presided, Mr. 
Clay, Mr. Randolph, and others, took part in the discus- 
sions which ensued, and which resulted in the organiza- 
tion of the American Colonization Society. Judge Wash- 
ington was chosen President, and of the seventeen Vice- 
Presidents, only five were selected from the free States, 
while the twelve managers were, it is believed, without 
one exception, slaveholders.' 

t; In the Appendix to the fourteenth annual Report, in 
an attempt to prove to the slaveholders, that the Colon- 
ization scheme is well adapted to promote their interests, 
this language is used: ; nor should it be forgotten, that 
most of those who met to organize the Society, and ALL 
who expressed their sentiments on that occasion, were 
slaveholders.' Will any one now question this part of 
our statement, c that the Colonization Society was insti- 
tuted mainly by slaveholders V 

" Next, it devolves upon us to show that it was c pur- 
posely for the removal of the free people of color from 
this country.' 

c * This is evident from the first article in their^ Consti- 
tution. Here it is : 

"'Art. 1. This Society shall be called the American 
Society for Colonizing the Free People of Color in the 
United States.' 

" The second article is equally, or even more explicit 
on this point. It reads thus : 

" ' Art. 2d. The object to which its attention is to be 
exclusively directed, is to promote and execute a plan for 

3 



158 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

colonizing (with their own consent) the free people of 
color residing in our country, in Africa, or such other 
place as Congress shall deem most expedient, 5 etc. 

u Thus far then we have substantiated our statement. 
It remains now to prove that it was ' in order that 
none of the despised class might enjoy liberty among 
us. 5 

" The Constitution of the society leaves us altogether 
in the dark as to its motives, further than they can be 
ascertained by the expression of its object. They do not 
tell us why they, wished to colonize the free people of 
color, but it is evident that it could not have been for 
their own benefit nor for the benefit of Africa ; for it is 
expressly set forth, that they are to be colonized ' in Afri- 
ca, or such other place as Congress shall deem best- 5 
Any place out of the United States. Does not this look 
like a design to prevent them from enjoying liberty 
among us ? But we have stronger testimony than this. 
It is true, in one sense, as the writer of the Review says, 
that ' the Colonization Society had no power, if they had 
desired to do so, to compel free people to go to Africa, 5 
but they had the power, and have used it extensively, to 
exert such an influence as to cause the situation of free 
colored people to be extremely unpleasant here, and thus 
to induce them to go to Africa. Recollect, the object 
was to promote and execute a plan for colonizing (with 
their own consent). This plan could not be executed un- 
less their consent could be obtained. To obtain their con- 
sent then, was a part of their object, as much as to col- 
onize them. They do not say their object is to colonize 
them if they consent to go, but to colonize them w T ith their 
consent. Those w r ho are acquainted with the history of 
this affair know something, and those who will take the 
trouble to examine it may know something of the diabol- 
ical means resorted to, to obtain that consent, both in the 
slave and free States. In order to show more conclusively 
that the design was to prevent free colored people from 
enjoying liberty among us, we will make a few quota- 
tions. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 159 

"'Free blacks are a greater nuisance than even slaves 
themselves.' Address of C. C. Harper, African Repos- 
itory, vol, XI, page 189. 

" i A horde of miserable people — the objects of univer- 
sal suspicion — subsisting by plunder.' Speech of Mercer % 
Vice- President. 

" < Of all classes of our population, the most vicious is 
that of the free colored— contaminated themselves, they 
extend their vices to all around them.' Speech of Henry 
Clay, Vice-President. 12th Report, p. 21. 

" 'Averse to labor, with no incentives to industry or 
motives to respect, they maintain a precarious existence 
by petty thefts and'plunder.' Af Rep. VI. 135. 

" 'An anomalous race of beings, the most depraved 
upon earth.' Af. Rep. TIL 135. 

"We could give much more of the same character if our 
limits would allow, and it were necessary, showing the 
means used for carrying out the plan of the society. Is 
it not plain that the object of these speakers and writers 
was to excite a strong prejudice against the free colored 
population— -to induce such measures toward them as 
would extort their consent to removal ? Is this the lan- 
guage of kindness and benevolence ? And are the au- 
thors of these sentiments, the men spoken of by our re- 
viewer, as ' men of the best talents, of the highest order 
of practical benevolence and undoubted piety V They 
are certainly among the leaders, and he says, ' such as 
these have always been among the leaders.' 

"As a further evidence of the tendency of the scheme 
to promote the oppression of the free colored people in 
this country, to obtain their consent to be expatriated, we 
will make a few more quotations. 

"'This law (a law by which a manumitted negro be- 
comes again a slave if he remains twelve months in the 
State), odious and unjust as it may at first view appear, 
and hard as it may seem to bear upon the liberated negro, 
was, doubtless, dictated by sound, policy , and its repeal 
would be regarded by none with more unfeigned regret 
than by the friends of African Colonization. It has 



160 HISTORY OF THE SE^AfcATlOtf IN 

restrained many masters from giving freedom to their 
slaves and has thereby contributed to check the growth of 
an evil already too great and formidable. 5 Memorial of 
Powhattan Col. Soc. to Virginia Legislature. 

"'-*! am clear that whether we consider it with refer- 
ence to the welfare of the State, or the happiness of the 
blacks, it were better to have left them in CHAINS, than 
to have liberated them to receive such freedom as they 
enjoy, and greater freedom w r e cannot, must not allow 
them. 5 Af Rep. III. 197. 

" ' We do not ask that the provisions of our Constitu- 
tion and statute book should be so modified as to relieve 
and exalt the condition of the colored people while they 
remain with us. Let these provisions stand in all their 
rigor, to work out the ultimate and unbounded good of 
these people. 5 The obvious meaning of this is, to com- 
pel them to go to Africa. Memorial of the N. Y. State 
Col. Soc. to the Legislature. 

" Brodnax, a strong advocate of Colonization, said, in 
the Virginia Legislature : 

" 'Lt is idle to talk about not resorting to force. Every 
body must look to the introduction of force of some kind 
or other. If the free negroes are willing to go, they will 
go ; if not, they must be compelled to go.' And again, 
'all of us look to force of some kind or other, direct or in- 
direct, moral or physical, legal or illegal. 5 

" The free people of color early discovered the evil 
tendencies and prejudicial effects of this scheme and 
generally opposed to it. At a meeting of them held in 
New Bedford, in 1832, the following resolutions were 
passed. 

" c Resolved, That in whatever light we view the Col- 
onization Society, we discover nothing in it but terror, 
prejudice, and oppression. The w T arm and beneficent 
hand of philanthropy is not apparent in the system, but 
the influence of the society on public opinion is more 
prejudicial to the interests and welfare of the people of 
color in the United States than Slavery itself. 5 

" 'Resolved, That the society, to effect its purpose, the 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 161 

removal of the free people of color (not the slaves) 
through its agents, teaches the public to believe that it is 
patriotic and benevolent to withhold from us knowledge, 
and means of acquiring subsistence ; and to look upon 
us as unnatural and illegal residents in this country, and 
thus by the force of prejudice, if not by law, endeavor 
to compel us to embark for Africa, and that, too, appa- 
rently by our own free-will and consent.' 

u Let the impartial reader now judge whether we have 
not fully substantiated the charge that the c Colonization 
Society was instituted mainly by slaveholders, and pur- 
posely for the removal of the free people of color from 
this country, in order that none of the despised class 
might enjoy liberty among us. Where then is the 
c shame to our religion V the c handle for infidels V They 
consist in the facts that the charge is true, and that pro- 
fessing Christians, well acquainted with the circum- 
stances, should attempt to mislead the uninformed by 
denying it. That the Colonization scheme has had the 
effect to strengthen the chains of the slave, and that it 
was so intended, is attested by the memorial of the Pow- 
hattan Colonization Society to the Virginia Legislature, 
in the following language: ^ It has restrained many 
masters from giving liberty to their slaves, and has 
thereby contributed to check the growth of an evil 
already too great and formidable^ This is the society 
which we have charged the leading characters in the old 
Yearly Meeting with favoring, and of this charge they 
stand convicted before the public. Whether they support 
it for the purpose of producing these results or not, is not 
the question at issue. It is enough that they advocate a 
scheme having such tendencies and instituted for such 
purposes. 

"We have not charged them, as the writer intimates, 
with relying upon Colonization, to extingish Slavery. 
This was no part of the object in the formation of the 
society, but directly the reverse. If we could believe 
them ignorant enough to advocate the Colonization 
Society as a means of abolishing Slavery, we could look 



162 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

upon their conduct with more charity ; and notwithstand- 
ing the denial of such motives by the reviewer, we do 
hope that some of those who favor the scheme, do it in 
ignorance, not knowing its design and tendencies, but 
looking upon it as a means of exterminating Slavery. 

u This is the institution our author attempts to justify, 
a hundredth part of the obliquity and moral turpitude of 
the actions and principles of which cannot be disclosed 
in our limits. He even declares in effect, that it is more 
objectionable to assist a brother, who, having fallen 
among thieves and been stripped, wounded, and robbed 
of everything, has escaped them and come to our houses, 
although naked and hungry, than to support that 
association. 

"A society, too, the funds of which go directly to pay 
for instruments of death, and for obtaining implements 
to defend their colony with devastation and slaughter. 
He even dared to assert that to contribute to those funds 
is not contrary to any Advice of the Yearly Meeting of 
Indiana heretofore issued. In 1836, that Yearly Meeting 
cautioned its members to take no part in, nor render any 
aid to, any political association on the subject of African 
Slavery, which is, or may be founded on principles either 
directly or indirectly, having a tendency to promote the 
unrighteous work of expatriation; it being our settled 
conviction that this work, as a condition to the slaves 
being set at liberty, is unjust and oppressive. In 1838, 
it says : c fearing that there are of our members occupying 
and contending for grounds that are not in full accordance 
with our well known testimonies on this important sub- 
ject, by too much countenancing the policy of the day, 
which denies to that class of our fellow-beings the capa- 
city of enjoying the natural rights of man, only on the 
terms of expatriation, we earnestly invite Friends to 
renewed exertions on behalf of suffering humanity, etc' 

' 4 Now it is well known that it is the policy of the 
American Colonization Society and its prominent advo- 
cates, to oppose any scheme of emancipation without 
Colonization, and the author of the Review must know (it 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 163 

cannot be otherwise) that it was this association that was 
alluded to in the Advices above quoted, and yet he says, 
virtually, it is not contrary to them, to aid, support, and 
countenance this scheme ! although it is evident that he 
endeavors to mislead his readers by representing it as 
merely aiding in voluntary removals ; but we have seen 
what kind of voluntary removals this society and its 
advocates endeavor to promote. 

u He says, page 6, ' the Advice of the Yearly Meeting 
was against participating in the work of expatriation ; by 
which it was undoubtedly meant, forcible removal.' 
Here he, in effect, says that the Advice was against 
directly aiding in this work. Not so ; it was against 
aiding an association founded on principles having a 
tendency, either directly or indirectly, to promote this 
unrighteous work, and we have shown that such was the 
tendency of the Colonization Society! 

"Again, he endeavors to confound the principles of 
Buxton and many other English philanthropists in regard 
to forming colonies on the western coast of Africa, with 
this nefarious scheme of slaveholders ; while, at the same 
time, he must be aware that Buxton has condemned and 
repudiated it in the most unqualified terms. 

" There is one very strange feature about this little 
anonymous document. The author, after endeavoring to 
advocate and defend the Colonization Society as a good 
institution, and never once uttering a syllable against 
any of its principles or measures, says, that ' Friends of 
Indiana have taken very little part, in any way, in Colo- 
nization.' Now, if he really thinks it is such an institu- 
tion as he would have us believe, why should he, in 
endeavoring to defend the Society of Friends, declare 
that it has taken very little part in supporting it. To us 
it is clear that he does not believe his own representa- 
tions of its character, or else that he has charged those 
whom he professes to defend, with criminal apathy, in 
neglecting to support a work, so good as he represents 
it to be. 

" But here it should be remembered, that it was not 



164 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

on account of the members of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
being so largely engaged in actual colonization, or of 
their rendering any great pecuniary support to that 
society, that the subject was spoken of in the Declaration, 
in either place, but to show the sentiment and feeling of 
the leaders in the ruling party, in favor thereof, to show 
the existence of those feelings among them which present 
one of the most powerful barriers to the progress of the 
cause of immediate emancipation in our country, feelings 
which almost everywhere around us are expressed in 
language like this : ' I am as much opposed to Slavery as 
anybody, but I don't want the niggers set free here among 
us.' ' If they could have a country to themselves, I 
should be glad they were free, but I don't w T ant them 
turned loose unless they are colonized. 5 When the same 
sentiments are expressed by those Friends in unity with 
the ruling party of that Yearly Meeting, they generally 
assume a somew T hat milder form, such as, c I would 
rather they were somewhere to themselves.' c Would it 
not be better for both classes (whites and blacks), for the 
colored people to be in a country of their own V etc. On 
page 4 of the Review, the author asserts that the labors 
of Friends, in promoting the extinction of Slavery, have 
been active and unremitted for fifty years or more. 

" It is difficult to conceive of a greater departure from 
all truth, than there is in this Declaration. It is well 
known that fifty or sixty years ago, and some time after, 
many of the most prominent members of the society 
were actively engaged in associations, organized ex- 
pressly for the purpose of promoting the abolition of 
Slavery, in addition to what was being done among 
Friends as a religious society; which all w r ho are ap- 
prised of the zeal and energy of the influential part, 
must know, was far more than what it has accomplished 
in that capacity at any recent date. And it is equally 
well known, that all those societies have been suffered to 
expire for want of this energy and zeal, with but one soli- 
tary exception, and so completely have they remitted all 
their efforts that a member of Society would now be con- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 165 

sidered as a violator of the Advice of Society even for 
holding membership in that very organization which. 
Friends more than fifty years ago were instrumental in 
establishing. 

" The author proceeds, page 2, to make some extracts 
from Woolman, which, he says, will make plain to any 
one who understands the views and is acquainted with 
the acts of the seceders, whether they hold and act upon 
his principles. Various quotations are then made, care- 
fully italicizing such passages as this: ' nothing is more 
precious than the mind of truth inwardly manifested f 
4 'inward prayer ;' c deeply bowed under the weight of the 
work f c looking often to the Lord for assistance ;' ; m 
the fear of the Lord J etc., and then winds up by saying, 
1 how different was John Woolman's spirit, how different 
his example of waiting and labor from theirs. 5 All this 
is mere assertion, and all the italicizing, together with 
his remarks, show that he, claiming to be with Woolman, 
claims also to occupy a position entirely the reverse of 
that held by Anti-Slavery Friends in regard to e inward 
prayer,' 'the fear of the Lord,' etc., and discovers to us 
much of the spirit of the Pharisee, alluded to by our 
Lord in the parable concerning one who, with a publican, 
went up into the temple to pray. The Pharisee stood 
and prayed thus with himself: 4 God, I thank thee that I 
am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, 
or even as this publican (Abolitionist), /fast twice in the 
week, /give tithes of all /possess,' '/pray, /fear the 
Lord, not like these deluded, self-active spirits.' But how 
is John Woolman's example different from the practice 
of Anti-Slavery Friends? 'in waiting and labor. 5 When 
we have become convinced of what was required of us, 
we have endeavored to perform it without further waiting, 
and not till then. Was this his doctrine and practice? 
4 Hear him ! Should we now be sensible of what He (the 
Lord) requires of us, and through a respect to some 
friendships which do not stand on an immutable founda- 
tion, neglect to do our duty in firmness and constancy, 
still waiting for some extraordinary means to bring about 



166 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

their (the slaves) deliverance, it may be that God may 
answer us in this matter by terrible things in righte- 
ousness.' Here then is no waiting after we have ascer- 
tained our duty, or if so, it will be at our peril. And 
what is the difference between his and our labors? The 
words in the following sentence, quoted from Woolman, 
placed in italics, will show, at least, part of what he 
thinks is different. c I joined with my friend in visiting 
Friends who liad slaves? The inference is plain. Abo- 
litionists generally do not go to those who have slaves, 
as he did. The same old Pro-Slavery excuse, ' why 
don't you go to the slaveholders, we have nothing to do 
with Slavery here, is evidently in his mind; and he 
would doubtless insinuate that Woolman had nothing to 
do with talking and discussing this subject among those 
who did not hold slaves. Now every one might and 
should know that this was not the fact. To be sure, he 
was not a member of an Anti-Slavery society, and for 
the very good reason, that he died about two years before 
the first one in America was organized, and very proba- 
bly before such an institution was ever thought of. No 
doubt, if an association of this kind had existed any- 
where near him in his lifetime, he would have been a 
member of it. But it should be recollected, that the 
author of the document pretends to claim and unite with 
the old Anti-Slavery organization. Will he say, that 
that institution had nothing to do with agitating the 
question among its members and others who were not 
slaveholders ? He cannot do it. And yet he unites with 
it, and condemns us for carrying out its practice. 

" On page 5th, our author quotes the following from 
the Declaration : c One branch of the (African) committee 
forwarded a report to its general meeting (in 1841), treat- 
ing the subject of the consumption of the proceeds of 
Slavery at some length, showing the impropriety and 
inconsistency of Friends sustaining a market for such 
productions. But when it was read in that body, it was 
spurned, it was rejected with manifest bitterness and 
contempt. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 167 

" l That ' savs he, ' is one version of the story, showing 
an example of the manner in which they relate a history 
of the past. The following is the true one, 5 and of 
course, he pronounces the other false. He then proceeds 
to state, that the committee had strong doubts of the pro- 
priety of having it read, or descending into the considera- 
tion of the subject in that capacity, inasmuch as it was 
altogether foreign to the business of their appointment, 
etc., without once noticing the argument, which all must 
know is founded in truth, that the consumption of the 
proceeds of Slavery was the very thing which had reduced 
this people to a situation which demanded the appoint- 
ment of the committee to have the care of their concerns, 
and that therefore it w T as not - foreign to the business of 
their' appointment, to take the subject into consideration, 
in order to act consistently, and not pretend to be alle- 
viating their distress with one hand and strengthening 
its groundwork with the other. But to proceed with 
what he says, is a true story, he remarks, £ the disaffected 
members of the committee showed so strong a desire to 
have the document read, the committee at length yielded 
in condescension, entirely to satisfy and gratify them, to 
take the time to hear it. After the reading, it was re- 
marked in substance about as follows : That this was a 
subject foreign to the business of this convention, and 
therefore not proper to be presented or discussed by it; 
that Friends now had all the right, and entire undoubted 
privilege to exercise freely their own conscience, in ab- 
staining from anything they saw fit on conscientious 
ground; a right and privilege which we would be far 
from abridging, but that we objected to the consideration 
of the subject in this committee, until it should be laid 
upon us as a part of our business, or to its being made a 
matter of discipline; it being entirely a matter of con- 
science. To these views, the main part of the commit- 
tee responded and were ready to respond, but the self- 
active spirits of some of the disaffected members were so 
uneasy at the expression of these remarks, and under this 
way of leaving the subject, that although Friends had, 



168 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

in condescension, suffered their document to be read, 
they could scarcely be restrained to let the committee 
rise in good order, as some of our Friends from a dis- 
tance will bear us witness. 5 

" We know not to what these Friends from a distance 
will bear witness; but one thing we do know, and that 
is, if they will bear testimony to the truth, they will not 
contradict the statement made in the Declaration ; for 
many of us were present in the committee, and know it 
to be true. But this gives an opportunity to explain the 
whole matter in regard to this subject being before that 
committee from the commencement, which as yet has not 
been done publicly. Before proceeding to this however, 
we would observe, that we do not recollect that there was 
any objection made to the subject of abstinence from 
slave-labor produce being made a matter of discipline, 
because it was entirely a matter of conscience ; but if it 
was so, it only discloses another of the profound absurdi- 
ties of that party. A matter of conscience should not 
be made a matter of discipline! Astonishing! Friends 
profess to be conscientiously opposed to war and fighting. 
We should then have no discipline on that subject. 
Conscientiously opposed to the use of oaths, therefore 
our Discipline should be silent on this point also; and so 
of all the rest of our testimonies which we propose to 
bear to the world. 

u In 1839, the General Committee on the concerns of 
the People of Color, had the subject of abstinence from 
slave-labor produce before it, and the different branches 
thereof in the Quarterly meetings were encouraged to 
endeavor to ascertain what facilities existed for the procur- 
ing of free-labor goods, and directed to make report 
thereof to the committee the next year. In 1840, after 
the 'alarm' had been taken, alluded to in our Declara- 
tion, when this committee met, one of the branches pro- 
duced a letter from a Friend in the east, relative to the 
subject and to that only, which the Clerk read in the 
regular order as the business of the meeting. But as 
soon as he was through with the reading, the committee 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 169 

presented indeed a most astonishing picture. That 
branch which forwarded it, was censured for presenting 
such a document, notwithstanding what they had done 
was in strict accordance with the requisition of the com- 
mittee the preceding .year, and the Olerk was censured 
also, although he had performed that only which de- 
volved upon him as a duty, by virtue of his appointment. 
And the committee finding itself in a condition, as was 
said, not suitable for the transaction of business, turned 
its attention, or at least, some of the prominent members 
of the opposing party, to seek for some place whereon to 
cast the blame of their then present situation, which they 
endeavored to fasten on the spectators, a number of whom 
were present, in consequence of the fact, that invitation 
had previously been given out, even in the Yearly Meet- 
ing, by members of the committee, for all to attend who 
felt interested in the concern ; and were quietly, without 
saying a word, listening to the proceedings of the com- 
mittee. ' We can see now, 5 said some of them, ' what 
we have come to, by throwing the doors open in this 
way,' or words to this import. 

u Thus finding so much unsoundness in Society in re- 
gard to the subject, Anti-Slavery Friends found it their 
duty to endeavor to turn the minds of Friends more par- 
ticularly thereto, and hence the report alluded to from one 
branch of the committee originated. When it was pre- 
sented to the General Committee in 1841, at its first 
sitting, probably by the Clerk, who perhaps, announced 
its character, it was treated with such manifest contempt, 
that one of those who spoke in favor of its being read, 
was interrupted while endeavoring to give his views, and 
considerable effort was used to stop him from proceeding 
further. Again, when another of the same class arose 
deliberately to deliver his sentiments, and one of the 
opposite side had put in before him, was quietly standing 
and waiting for him to get through, one among the 
leaders of the opposition rose, manifestly under the 
influence of great excitement, and addressing himself 
to the individual, accosted him with, ' it is very dis- 



170 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 

orderly for a Friend to get up and stand on his feet that 
way.' 

" Although the committee did not suffer it to be read 
at this sitting, yet it did not decide positively against it, 
and of course, it again came before them at the next, 
when, in the language of our reviewer, they condescended 
to suffer it to be read. After this was done, as all other 
business was gone through, an Anti-Slavery Friend rose 
and proposed that the meeting should then close. As 
soon as he took his seat one of the principal leaders of 
the opposition, and we have no doubt, the very person 
who has had at least a large share in preparing the Re- 
view under consideration, rose, and with much warmth, 
said the committee was not ready to adjourn — he was not 
going to sit under the reading of such a document, with- 
out expressing his decided disapprobation of it; with 
considerable more, which is not now recollected. Various 
others of the same class then spoke in favor of rejecting 
everything of the kind, and the conduct of Anti-Slavery 
Friends was severely censured, and they charged with 
making disturbance and disorder, which necessarily 
drew out some expression and defense. Now, we did 
not ask them to discuss the subject. We had no idea 
that any good would result from such discussion under 
the circumstances in which we were placed, but that it 
would only lead to disorder and confusion. Our object 
was to get the subject fairly before Friends, with the 
hope, that the truth would silently produce its proper 
effect upon their minds ; all we asked, was, that they 
should ' condescend to suffer ' us to tell them what we 
conscientiously believed was a right and consistent course 
for Friends to pursue, and there we were willing to leave 
it. And it was purposely to prevent disorder that the 
Friend made the proposition above mentioned, that the 
meeting should close as soon as the document was read. 
But they would not permit it to be so, and the disorder 
and confusion, which was great, was all among them- 
selves. And yet our author says, ' they could scarcely 
be restrained to let the committee rise in good order.' 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 171 

As said an Anti-Slavery Friend at the time when we 
were charged with creating disorder, so say we now: 
'There is one who knows who are the authors of this 
disorder and disturbance? and in addition, who they 
were that not only ' could scarcely be restrained,' but 
who would not suffer that - committee to rise in good 
order.' 

" In regard to the petition alluded to in the Declara- 
tion, which was presented to H. Clay, he observes, that 
4 it is well known, that this petition was got up merely 
for effect.' Now this is an assertion without the shadow 
of evidence of its truth, so far as we are able to ascertain, 
except the effect alluded to, was to the liberation of the 
slave. And we should suppose those who got it up 
would certainly know their motives as well as any 
others. 

" Again, ' it is said, that it was signed by men, women, 
children, and people of color ;' from which we infer 
that he considers it very objectionable for people of color, 
at least, to sign such a petition. These, in his opinion, 
should not presume to ask relief for their suffering 
brethren and sisters. Is this the sentiment of the lead- 
ing members of the body? And is there no evidence of 
prejudice against colored people in this? But let us 
proceed with his remarks. ' The manner of its presen- 
tation was very reprehensible. He was attacked with it, 
in the midst of avast concourse of many thousands of his 
political friends, while on a visit to them, at their special 
invitation — and upon the public stand, whither he had 
gone to address them. 5 Here, again, we must pause in 
astonishment. He speaks as if he was personally ac- 
quainted with the whole transaction, and we have no 
doubt he is a resident of the city where it occurred, and 
yet the assertion that he was attacked with it in public, 
which, he says, is so reprehensible, is also utterly false ; the 
very reverse of what was the fact. The committee to 
present the petition, opened a correspondence with the 
particular attendants of Henry Clay, styled the Commit- 
tee of Keception, it being understood that this was the 



172 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

only means of access they could have to him, in order to 
ascertain when and where it would suit him to have an 
interview. It w T as agreed by this body, on the part of 
II. Clay, that they should present him with their papers 
on the next morning at his lodgings, it being alleged that 
he could not possibly receive them sooner. A short 
time after, when the committee had separated, J. Rariden 
announced to the multitude, that if the Abolitionists had 
any request to make of Clay, or papers to present to 
him, it was his (Clay's) wish, that it should he done pub- 
licly, and on that occasion. 

" So that the committee to present the petition, were 
prevented from doing it as they intended, in his private 
room at Richmond, which the reviewer says ' might 
have had a good effect upon his mind. 3 

" One thing we learn in pages 7 and 8, which we had 
hardly expected was the case, viz: that those who ad- 
here to the old organization ' were generally well satisfied 
with what took place' on First-day, in regard to the treat- 
ment of Henry Clay, by the Cierk and other leading 
Friends. The only effect it can possibly have, will be to 
convince all who are not willfully blind, that their faith- 
ful testimony against Slavery, consists in profession only. 
If a man, a distinguished stranger of equal talents w T ith 
Henry Clay, who had robbed his white neighbor by vio- 
lence of half his property, or had stolen a horse from 
him, should have visited Richmond at the same time, 
and had told the Clerk he was inclined to go to his meet- 
ing, would he have taken him there in his carriage and 
led him about by the arm as a brother beloved, and 
would Friends have conducted him into one of the most 
conspicuous seats in the meeting-house, etc. ? And yet 
he says in effect, it would have been a great and repre- 
hensible violation of all good manners, courtesy, good 
breeding, and duty not to show this respect to Henry 
Clay, a man who is continually robbing fifty colored per- 
sons not merely of a part, but of everything they should 
rightfully possess. Can any person define, consistently 
with a faithful testimony against Slavery, why such a 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 173 

character should command more respect than the petty- 
robber ? 

" Page 8. < But the Clerk of the meeting, as such, did 
not conduct Henry Clay.' 

" It seems to us he need not to have taken the pains to 
deny T that which no one supposed. We had no idea that 
he conducted him as Clerk. The object was, to show 
that he who had the confidence and support of the ruling 
party thus acted, and of course that it was a pretty good 
index to their character, unless they had shown their dis- 
approbation of the conduct, which they did not. 

" 'The meeting had no Clerk on that day, it being a 
public general meeting for worship.' 

" This is a mere quibble. He need not to have told 
that a meeting for worship has no Clerk. And he well 
knew that it was the Clerk of the Yearly Meeting that 
was spoken of in this quotation. And does he mean to 
say that the Yearly Meeting had no Clerk on that day ? 
If so, then after a sitting of the Meeting has adjourned, it 
has none to open it the next day ! 

" He declares, that the description of the treatment of 
Henry Clay in and about the meeting-house, is over- 
strained, etc., alleging that he was on the spot, an eye- 
witness, and supposing that the writer of the Declaration 
w T as not, seems to think he has the best right to know. 
Alas ! how liable people are to be mistaken when they 
move in ' their own will and strength!' The principal 
writer of the Declaration was on the spot also, and no 
doubt knew that the truth would have warranted a much 
stronger delineation of remarkable manifestations than 
he gave, at least some of us know it. 

" Under a pretense of correcting a report that had been 
circulated, 'that sundry women Friends had kissed Hen- 
ry Clay at the meeting,' he appends a note. But it is 
evident that it was for the mere purpose of charging us 
with originating the report and giving it currency ; for 
the editor of the Free Labor Advocate long since corrected 
it before the public. He asserts that we ' consider it of 
sufficient importance to talk over to the ridicule of their 



174 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

Society.' Now, we do not believe there is a particle of 
truth in this, for we never heard it done, of its being done, 
or of any one among us that believed the report. 

" But why did he decline noticing the report as it stood 
corrected in the Advocate, where it was distinctly stated 
that the kissing took place at a boarding-house in Rich- 
mond ? Simply, because he could not deny this report, 
and thought by denying the other, the impression would 
be made on the public mind, that there was no such oc- 
currence anywhere. 

" The whole of this, together with such expressions as 
the following: 'a great flourish this, when the words, 
1 Abolition lecturer,' would have expressed the whole af- 
fair, 5 shows conclusively, that he is strongly under the 
influence of prejudice, and that he associates in his mind, 
the Abolitionists, whom the Yearly Meeting, he pretends 
to defend, once called c Christian philanthropists,' with 
everything mean and contemptible. 

."It will be observed that he denies that Charles C. 
Burleigh was treated with indignity and contempt by 
Friends. 

a Now, it seems to us to be impossible, for any person 
who was present, and not willfully blind or hardened, 
and witnessed their carriage toward him, to make such 
a denial. When a Friend spoke to several members of 
the Meeting for Sufferings about the use of the house for 
Burleigh to hold a meeting in, he received the reply, 'let 
him go to the South with his abolition, we don't want 
any of it here.' 

" After quoting the remarks that Friends closed their 
meeting-house doors against him, etc., and stamping 
them as false, he affects to understand them as charging 
Friends with shutting him out of the Yearly Meeting or 
meeting for worship, and then again, in regard to the 
public houses in town being closed against him, he pre- 
tends to suppose that taverns and boarding-houses were 
alluded to. Now, this is indeed a pitiful quibble. Every 
one who will take the pains to read the Declaration, will 
understand perfectly well, that Friends are represented as 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 175 

refusing to allow him to hold a meeting in their meeting- 
house, and that it was those public houses in which meet- 
ings are held in town, that were spoken of. And indeed 
what he says, shows that he so understood the matter 
himself, notwithstanding his pretensions to the contrary; 
for he says, application was not made to the trustees in 
his behalf for the use of the house, to hold a meeting in ; 
and that ; if they have reference to the meeting-houses of 
any other religious professors, it is not necessary that we 
should answer for them. 5 

" He says, c the insinuation that Friends mobbed Bur- 
leigh in the street, is detestable.' 

" Truly there is no such insinuation, and no candid 
person will assert it. The most that can be made of it is, 
that the conduct of those who treated him thus, was sup- 
posed to have had a tendency to stimulate the mob ; 
which we really believe was the fact. And the writer 
himself can not believe, that if Burleigh had been treated 
with half that respect, that was shown to Henry Clay, by 
Friends and others, occupying responsible stations in the 
community, he would have been mobbed by a set of bad 
boys. 

"Page 9th he makes the following quotation: 'Thus 
it is evident, so far as an extensive tissue of facts and 
circumstances can establish, and so far as the fruit of a 
tree can manifest its character, that the influence by 
which the Yearly Meeting is now governed, is Pro-Sla- 
very, and that unsoundness lies at the bottom of the 
opposition with which we have been assailed.' 

" 'It is only (says he) by a strong exercise of charitable 
feeling, that we can be brought to think that the senti- 
ment expressed in this paragraph is not willfully errone- 
ous.' 

"He might with equal propriety have asserted that it 
was with difficulty that he could be brought to think the 
declaration of our Divine Master, ' by their fruits ye shall 
know them,' is not erroneous, for neither he nor any 
others have ever shown that those matters spoken of were 
not facts. They can not show that the fruits are not as rep- 



176 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

resented, which are most certainly Pro-Slavery ; but yet 
they deny that the tree is such. We have never said they 
have not professed to be ' decidedly and firmly against 
Slavery ; but we do say that that does not make them so ; 
and that men do not ' gather grapes of thorns, nor figs of 
thistles.' And it seems to us, from the position recently 
taken, and especially in the document under consideration, 
that their Anti-Slavery profession will shortly have to asso- 
ciate with as strong a Fro- Slavery one ; for if they are op- 
posed to immediate emancipation, of which we have no 
doubt some of the leaders are, then they are in favor of 
Slavery for a time, and therefore must be Pro-Slavery. 
Hence, those who profess opposition to immediate emanci- 
pation, must make a Pro-Slavery profession. This is clear. 
" In regard to what is spoken of in the Declaration, as 
the most common ground of opposition, namely, c a de- 
sire to retain a place and influence with the rulers of the 
land, 5 which was shown to be equivalent to a desire to 
retain a place and influence with the very essence of a 
corrupt popular sentiment, and which induced them to 
close their meeting-houses against those whom they had 
formerly declared were laboring on the same ground they 
themselves had for many years occupied, and forbid their 
members associating with them, in order to accomplish 
that object ; he in effect queries, ' and why not do so V 
He knew very well that Anti-Slavery Friends were not 
opposed to retaining a place and influence with any per- 
son, which had been acquired by a firm, uncompromising 
adherence to sound principle and duty. He knew very 
well that it was that policy in the Yearly Meeting that 
trampled under foot, those whom it before denominated 
Christian philanthropists, rather than lose their good 
name in the world, by being identified with them, seeing 
they had become the targets of popular fury, that was 
spoken of in the Declaration. Why then did he not 
meet the subject on fair ground, and if such w T as not the 
fact, make it appear ? Again he says, ' if the truth is to 
be declared to one that has departed from the right way, 
will it not be most effectually done in the spirit of kind- 



INDIANA YEABLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 177 

ness V We answer, most certainly. But should we be 
declaring the truth to one we might wish to gain, who 
was a thief, a liar, or murderer, should we mince the 
matter, and fail to tell him his real condition ? Does 
declaring the truth, in terms that cannot be misunder- 
stood, manifest a spirit of unkindness ? Did our Saviour 
evince a want of kindness, when he said to the Jews, 
4 O generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damna- 
tion of hell?' 'Woe unto you. Scribes and Pharisees, 
hypocrites !' ' Ye fools and blind !' etc. Did the apostle 
Paul lack the spirit of kindness, when he said to the sor- 
cerer, £ O full of all subtil ty and all mischief, thou child 
of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou 
not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord V 

" Page 10, he says, the insinuation on page 17, that 
by being thus mild, and acting up to the Advice they 
quote, ; Friends are yielding to the prejudices ; or ac- 
commodating ourselves to the corrupt views and senti- 
ments of those around us, in regard to Slavery, comes 
without any substantial proof, and is believed to be 
groundless. 5 

" Every one who will take the trouble to read the 
Declaration, will see that it is there shown, that the 
place and influence with the rulers of the land, alluded 
to in the Advice he speaks of, was to be retained by not 
associating with the Abolitionists and by not giving Anti- 
Slavery societies any countenance whatever ; and that 
individuals of the highest standing anions; them did not 
hesitate to avow in direct terms, that Friends should 
have no connection with the Abolitionists because they 
were hated, alleging that if Friends should join their so- 
cieties they would lose their influence with the slavehold- 
ers, etc., without saying a word against their principles. 
It is there also shown that even the committee from the 
Yearly Meeting took the ground that the wealthy and in- 
fluential part of the community not being engaged in 
Anti-Slavery societies, made it wrong for Friends to be. 
And yet he has the temerity to state, that the Declara- 
tion, that they have yielded to the prejudices and accom- 



* 



178 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

modated themselves to the corrupt views and sentiments 
of others, ' comes without any substantial proof, and is 
believed to be groundless.' 

" In regard to noticing the case of those who were 
reported to the Yearly Meeting as disqualified members 
of the Meeting for Sufferings, he observes. ; as those 
eight members are among the principal leaders in the 
schism, and this declaration was probably drawn up by 
them, a sense of modesty, one would have thought, 
ought to have prevented their making this circumstance 
public.' 

This is indeed adding insult to injury. After publish- 
ing the names of four of those individuals in five thou- 
sand copies of the printed Minutes of the Yearly Meeting 
as offenders, it is truly astonishing that they should be 
accused of a want of modesty in making it public, for the 
purpose of defending their characters against the public 
aspersions of their accusers. 

" Again, he says, ' we should also think that any per- 
son of calm mind, who knows what their proceedings 
have been since that report, could not for a moment 
doubt the propriety and justice of the measure.' 

" This, we suppose, is a fair exhibition of the justice 
of the party he advocates. He here, no doubt, alludes 
to their Separation from Indiana Yearly Meeting. Now 
let us, for the sake of argument, admit they did wrong 
in that act. 

u Then let us suppose that the writer of the Review 
becomes exasperated at a brother, and commences a 
tirade of abuse upon his person, and finally the sufferer's 
patience becomes exhausted and he begins to retaliate, 
which is certainly wrong. Now would we think that 
any person of calm mind, who knows that he did retali- 
ate, could for a moment doubt the propriety and justice 
of thus abusing him, or would this retaliation prove that 
he deserved the abuse ? 

" But not so in regard to the Separation. It was made 
under an imperious sense of duty, and not to retaliate or 
for self- gratification. We come now to his defense of the 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 179 

course pursued by the Meeting for Sufferings toward 
these individuals. But he appears careful not to rehearse 
the statements in the Declaration, showing conclusively 
that it was contrary to the plain letter of Discipline. If 
such was not the case, if it was not contrary to Discipline,, 
why did he not cite us to the passage which justifies it? 
6 It "would (says he) indeed be very strange doctrine to 
presume that the Yearly Meeting has not power to see 
that it is fairly represented by this body, which is ap- 
pointed by itself? Here is another specimen of what an 
"over-active zeal' will induce a man to utter. He asserts 
that the Meeting for Sufferings is appointed by the 
Yearly Meeting itself, and, therefore, should dismiss and 
appoint until it is fairly represented. Xow the fact is, 
according to Discipline, the Yearly Meeting has no power 
to appoint more than twenty-six members to represent 
it, and each Quarter has the power to appoint four to 
represent it. But we suppose he cares not for the Disci- 
pline, for by the course he and his copartners take, they 
completely deprive the Quarters of this privilege. 

" It would, indeed, be very strange doctrine, to presume 
the Yearly Meeting has power to reserve privileges, and 
none to grant them ; and the Discipline shows what it 
has reserved and granted; and that all it reserved, in 
this matter, was to appoint twenty-six members itself, 
and that that granted to the Meeting for Sufferings, is to 
notify the Yearly and Quarterly meetings if any of the 
members appointed in either, have deceased or greatly 
neglected the attendance of its meetings, in order that 
their places may be filled ; and that granted to each 
Quarterly meeting, is to appoint four to represent it; and 
that to individuals appointed as members, that they 
should remain such while members of Society, unless 
they should request to be released or should neglect to 
attend the meetings. This is the exact regulation of Dis- 
cipline, according to plain and undoubted inference ; 
there being no provision in Discipline for a change in 
any other way ; and if the Yearly Meeting will not com- 
ply with its own regulations, on its own part, how can it 



180 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

expect its subordinate branches and individual members 
to do it ? If it wishes to reserve more power in its 
hands, let it take up the Discipline and alter it to that 
effect. 

u He says, c it has been a general rule in our Meeting 
for Sufferings, which the Yearly Meeting has always 
recognized, that the former, standing, as it does, to 
watch the interests of Society, has the liberty to make 
any suggestion or proposition to the latter, which the 
state of society may require, or which may be thought 
proper. 5 

" There is a great deal more cunning in this than can- 
dor. Was it a mere proposition of the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings to the Yearly Meeting, for it to report a number 
of its members to the Quarters, as well as Yearly Meet 
ing, as disqualified, in order for their place to be filled 
with others ? If this is not acting as with authority we 
know not what is. And will he say that the Yearly 
Meeting has always granted the Meeting for Sufferings 
the liberty to act in any way it may think proper? If it 
has, it has granted that which the Discipline expressly 
forbids. 

"Again, he proceeds to observe, c now here are certain 
members of the Meeting for Sufferings, who do not 
represent the Yearly Meeting,' etc. We would like to 
know what he styles the Yearly Meeting. Is it that portion 
which holds a certain set of sentiments and opinions, or 
is it the whole body of members? If the latter, we 
should suppose these members to which he alludes, con- 
stituted as proper a representation as those who had dif- 
ferent sentiments. True, we know when they come 
together to transact business they must settle upon some 
course to be pursued, and perhaps that course (especially if 
it be adopted through the power of 'wealth and influence,' 
or by the preponderance of numbers, independent of, and 
in opposition to, the evidence of Truth, as has been the 
case in regard to the present controversy) is wounding 
to the feelings of many of its members, and requires a 
violation of their conscientious principles. Must these, 



INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 181 

therefore, for opposing this wrong, and thus endeavoring 
to produce righteous action in that body and throughout 
Society, be deprived of representing themselves and their 
conscientious suffering brethren then, merely for making 
this exertion! Must those who feel it their bounden 
duty, in accordance with the advice of the Discipline, to 
be accessory to no step whereby the bondage of the slaves 
may be prolonged, be compelled to approve or connive 
at those proceedings which cast odium and obloquy upon 
the advocates of their immediate and unconditional free- 
dom, and thus be accessory to that which, if it should 
continue, would prolong the bondage of the slave inter- 
minably ? 

" These individuals, he says, have 'been talked to 
kindly again and again, they have been persuaded and 
admonished, but they refuse to be persuaded. They 
refuse to change.' Here he would make his readers 
believe that abundance of care was exercised toward 
them in the overflowings of kindness and brotherly love. 
But the fact is, but one of the eight was ever spoken to 
privately to persuade him to change, and when he was 
; approached, in order to gain him, 5 by one of those 
4 Friends eminent for his piety,' it was done by declaring 
to him, 'thou art gone, fallen, and out of the life, and if 
thou removes to Michigan thou wilt be lost forever !' etc. 
This is the character of their persuasive language. And 
scarcely ever did they condescend to enter into a free 
conversation, showing that they felt willing to inquire 
whether he or they were right. The leading feature of 
all their interviews was, thou must submit. 

" He says, ' it is easy to see why the proposition was 
made in the Yearly Meeting that the Minutes should 
state the cause of their disqualification, and that the 
object of that proposition was of a political nature, 
designed entirely to create difficulty by throwing out this 
plausible defense.' Xow it is well known that Charles 
Osborne was the man who made the proposition to the 
Yearly Meeting. Hence, no wonder the writer withholds 
his name from such a libel on his character. For we 

9 



182 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

trust, none who are not blind with malice, will believe 
that Charles Osborne did it merely to create a difficulty. 
He stated publicly why the cause should be placed on 
Minute, namely; that it was their due — justice demanded 
it, the cause of Truth and righteousness demanded it, 
and the cause of suffering, bleeding humanity demanded 
it. His object was, if we may believe his own testimony, 
that justice, truth, and righteousness might not be so 
completely prostrated in the dust. But why should it 
create a difficulty, or why should they suppose that any 
would think it would, to state the truth, to state the 
alleged cause of disqualification, if it was something they 
had done which would justify their opposers according 
to Discipline and usages of Society in making such an 
allegation ? Why should it create a difficulty to place 
these individuals in the exact position, before the public, 
which they really occupied, and not leave the matter in 
such a condition as for it to be supposed they had been 
guilty of gross immorality, and were disowned? For 
nowhere can it be found in the proceedings of the Yearly 
Meeting that a member of the Meeting for Sufferings 
has been reported as disqualified, except he has been dis- 
owned, and that, perhaps, for immoral conduct. But 
again after stating that it was their design merely to 
create a difficulty, he says, 4 hence the reason is plain 
why the meeting passed on without granting a request so 
unprecedented.' This is indeed strange reasoning. A 
person asks that which is just and reasonable (for he does 
not pretend to show to the contrary, nor even to contra- 
dict its being so) with a design to create difficulty, hence 
the reason is plain, is it, why a body of people professing 
to do justice should refuse to grant that which is just and 
reasonable ? The request which, he says, was so unpre- 
cedented, cannot possibly, we think, be more so than the 
treatment toward them which made it necessary to make 
it, as it has been clearly shown to the public, that none 
such has been made use of, so far as the records 
have been examined, which has been for fifteen 
years back. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 183 

"After this, he proceeds to state, c we cannot now call 
up in review every objectionable sentence and expres- 
sion. The whole document is written in a spirit so evi- 
dently bad, toward our religious society, that most 
impartial readers will readily see and feel it.' With 
equal propriety might the Scribes and Pharisees have 
declared to our Saviour, thy conversation to us manifests 
a spirit so evidently bad toward us, that most impartial 
hearers will readily see and feel it. He exposed and 
rebuked their corrupt principles and practices, and Anti- 
Slavery Friends have done no more in regard to that 
party who have assumed the control of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting. 

"But to proceed, our author says, 'it maybe added 
that the whole is written under such perversions of 
thought, that most of the matters brought to view are 
unfairly or incorrectly represented, or shown out under 
false colors.' We trust that every impartial reader, by this 
time, will see where the perversion of thought and mis- 
representation lies, for he cannot fail to discover the fact 
that in every attempt to show the falsity of the state- 
ments or representations contained in the Declaration, he 
has utterly failed. True, he has denied that which it 
would be impossible to prove either one way or the other, 
viz. : that there were no such remarkable demonstrations 
made, as would appear from the Declaration, in regard to 
the treatment of Henry Clay at the meeting-house. For 
really, they were remarkable to those who felt it their 
duty to render honor to whom honor is due, which they 
knew could not be to this man. While on the other 
hand, the writer and those who are with him, ' were well 
satisfied with the whole transaction,' and, therefore, to 
these it was nothing remarkable. 

" Let us now examine some of the articles of his 
conclusion. ' They make a general, and, in many cases, 
unexplained charge of Colonization against the Society, 
etc. This charge contains a slander, because when ex- 
plained out in words they interpret it to be a disposition 
to drive from the country, without their consent, the 



184 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

people of color generally, on account of an unjust esti- 
mation, or disregard of their rights, on account of unmer- 
ited prejudices against them, and for the purpose of per- 
petuating Slavery. 5 This is another misrepresentation. 
That which they are charged with is, in the Declaration, 
clearly explained to be a disposition to aid and counten- 
ance the American Colonization Society. And if it has 
been 'explained out in words to mean a disposition to 
drive from the country without their consent, 5 the writer 
and his copartners have done it themselves. The Decla- 
ration nowhere intimates that Friends engaged in the 
Colonization scheme, for the jourjpose of compelling the 
colored people to go to Liberia, or for the purpose of per- 
petuating Slavery. But it does, in effect, say that Friends, 
being under the influence of prejudice against the colored 
people, had those prejudices increased, or their efforts, in 
behalf of immediate emancipation diminished, by the for- 
mation of the Colonization Society, which proposed to 
take those people out of the country who they had rather 
were to themselves, in their own country where they be- 
long, etc. It is useless, however, to endeavor to substan- 
tiate a charge of the existence of this prejudice among 
them, when the sentiment is openly avowed almost every- 
where around us. 

" It will be seen, from what has been said, and from a 
careful examination of both documents, that all the prin- 
cipal grounds taken, or assertions made, by the Declara- 
tion are, by the Review under consideration, proved to be 
true, which we will sum up in the following order: 
" ' 1st. That a Pro-Slavery spirit exists in the Society.' 
"This he shows by evidently opposing immediate 
emancipation, and by declaring, in effect, that the slave- 
holders, laying claim to a person, makes it more objec- 
tionable to assist such person than to assist a free 
one ; thus, to a certain extent at least, recognizing the 
slaveholder's right to his brother, which all who are not 
willfully blind must know at once is a Pro-Slavery posi- 
tion. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 185 

"'2d. That they have a warm feeling in favor of the 

American Colonization Society.' 

"This is shown to be correct by his defense of that 
institution, and by at least tacitly owning and approving 
all its principles, measures, and tendencies. 

" ' 3d. That ever since the issuing of the Advices repu- 
diating the Colonization scheme, there were some of our 
prominent members, open advocates of that institution, 
who appeared to have been fired with indignation at the 
expression of such sentiments, evidently entertaining a 
settled purpose to prostrate the Anti-Slavery cause and its 
advocates in the Society, if ever a favorable opportunity 
should present.' 

"This he verifies by his allusion to a disposition in 
some to govern the Yearly Meeting in their own way. It 
was this disposition to promote an Anti-Slavery feeling 
and action in the Society, and to oppose Colonization, that 
was discovered and checked by those who entertained a 
settled purpose to prostrate the Anti-Slavery cause and 
its advocates. 

" ' 4th. That the ruling party in the Yearly Meeting, 
are really opposed to the present Anti-Slavery movement 
and not merely as they professed, opposed to mixing with 
others.' 

" In regard to this, there is such an open avowal of 
opposition to the cause in such terms as manifests the 
most decided malignity of feeling toward it, toward 
I modern Abolition societies,' as he terms them in con- 
tempt, as to require only a reference thereto. 

" Many of the charges, misrepresentations, insinua- 
tions, and falsehoods contained in the Review, seem, in- 
deed, too insignificant to notice, and had it not been for 
the source from which they emanated, and the weight 
of influence they may wield against the cause of Truth, 
if suffered to go unanswered, being widely indorsed by 
the leading characters of Indiana Yearly Meeting, we 
should have passed over them as unworthy of attention. 
"Signed on behalf of the meeting aforesaid. 

"Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 



186 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

CHAPTER XV. 

Declaration of Sentiment of A. S. Friends. 

It was thought necessary at the Yearly Meeting of 
Anti-Slavery Friends, in Ninth month, of this year, 
1843, in order to clear the Society of certain charges, and 
to vindicate the truth, to issue the following Declaration 
of Sentiment : 

" A DECLARATION OF SENTIMENT. 

" It is a subject worthy of particular attention, that in 
every age of the world, those who have attempted to 
stem the torrent of public error, or to withstand the cor- 
ruptions of the times, either in principle or practice, have 
been subjected to the invectives of malice, or the slander- 
ous imputations of those who have endeavored to uphold 
and sustain those corruptions. Our blessed Lord and 
the apostles themselves, had many grievous and false 
charges laid against them, nor were our primitive Friends 
at all exempted from the persecutions of this wicked 
spirit ; and they very frequently found it necessary and 
incumbent upon them to come boldly forth in the public 
declaration of their principles, and in the defense of their 
doctrines and practices, in order for the clearing of the 
blessed truth which they professed, and thus to expose 
and refute the slanderous imputations preferred against 
them. And as we believe a proper regard for the pro- 
motion of the cause of our blessed Redeemer at the pre- 
sent day, will unquestionably lead to this course of con- 
duct, we can but esteem it our indispensable duty, when- 
ever circumstances of a similar character occur, to follow 
their example in all meekness and Christian boldness. 

" It is indeed to us a sorrowful circumstance, that we 
have been driven to the necessity of separating ourselves 
from the original organization of the Society of Friends 
of Indiana Yearly Meeting, as the only alternative left 
us by that body, whereby we could enjoy the privileges 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 187 

and benefits of religious society, and at the same time 
act in obedience to the dictates of a tender conscience. 

" In the course of the insidious workings of the spirit 
of opposition to the present Anti-Slavery cause (for 
laboring to promote which, we have been driven to our 
present position), to impress and bias the minds of the 
people against it and its advocates, great pains have 
been taken to represent us as holding false and erroneous 
doctrines. 

" We have been charged, at least indirectly, with de- 
nying the immediate and special influence of the Holy 
Spirit upon the heart; or in other words, the immediate 
revelation of the Divine will to man ; and directly, with 
working in our own will and strength, without waiting 
for or receiving Divine ability, to enable us to perform 
those works in which we were engaged. 

u These charges appear to be the false deductions of a 
censorious spirit, which have been wrested from the pro- 
fessions we have made of the true and genuine doctrine, 
and which we now publicly repeat in the language of 
Scripture: c He hath showed thee, O man, what is good ; 
and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, 
to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God. 5 

" From this, and other Scripture testimony, as well as 
the very laws of our being, we are convinced that it is 
at all times required of us to do justly, love mercy, etc., 
as well as to fulfill all the moral precepts of the Gospel; 
and hence we hold that it is nothing short of presump- 
tion, to suppose a revelation upon these revelations is 
necessary before we should engage in works of benevo- 
lence and charity, or any of the common or general 
duties of life. To ask for a manifestation of the Divine 
will, or seek to witness a display of Divine power, when 
that will is already known, or the object to be effected 
by that power, can be effected by the means already 
afforded, is evidently regarded in this point of view by 
our Saviour himself, as we learn from his reply to the 
suggestions of the grand deceiver : ' If thou be the Son 
of God,' said he, ; cast thyself down (from the pinnacle 



188 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

of the temple), for it is written, he shall give his angels 
charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall 
bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against 
a stone.' But the reply was, 'It is written, thou shalt 
not tempt the Lord thy God. 5 And why would it be to 
tempt God to cast himself down with an expectation of 
being preserved from injury ? Undoubtedly, because there 
w r as no necessity for it. Just so, in regard to waiting for 
a special inward revelation to manifest w T hat is required 
of us, when w T e already know it. Some of our accusers, 
in endeavoring to make it appear that we are unsound in 
principle, have taken the extraordinary position, that we 
should not undertake to do any good work, without wait- 
ing for the immediate and special impulse of the Holy 
Spirit. Now, as principles must unavoidably have a 
powerful effect upon the conduct of those who possess 
them, can we at all wonder that those who hold such 
sentiments as these, should be found in such a state of 
inactivity as those are of whom we speak, especially in 
regard to objects requiring pecuniary or worldly sacrifices? 
We have ever held, and believed in the doctrine of imme- 
diate revelation, or the communication of the will of 
God to man ; but there is evidently a distinction to be 
made between such extraordinary and supernatural illu- 
minations as must alone quality for the public acts of 
preaching the gospel, prayer, etc., and that influence of 
the Holy Spirit, which is with all and in all (except they 
be reprobates,) to incline them to every good word and 
work, and to qualify for all the common general duties of 
life; and hence, when w r e speak of no necessity of wait- 
ing for the special impulse of the Holy Spirit in regard 
to performing those duties, we by no means discard the 
teachings of the good Spirit, which is placed in the hearts 
of men universally, inclining them to live soberly, right- 
eously, and godly in the present world; for whether we 
eat or drink, or whatsoever we do, we should do all to 
the glory of God. Every gift of God is good, and should 
be received with thanksgiving, and applied to the pur- 
poses for which he designed it. And hence the Holy 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 189 

Scriptures, containing a revelation of the will of God to 
man, in regard to all general duties, both toward God 
and his fellow-man, as well as the light of reason and re- 
flection, by which we may ascertain the consistency of a 
given course of conduct with this manifestation of the 
Divine will, are gifts which cannot be discarded without 
rejecting the means which a gracious Providence has or- 
dained for the guidance of man in regard to these duties. 
All these gifts, when applied according to His will, must 
and will completely harmonize in their legitimate effects. 
And although it is through the influence of the Holy 
Spirit immediately operating upon the heart, that we are 
inclined to anything that is good — that a devout thought 
is engendered in the heart, or that a saving knowledge 
of God is communicated to us, yet, through the proper 
use of the gifts above referred to, without any special or 
extraordinary revelation, we may ascertain what is right 
in regard to social and benevolent duties of general obli- 
gation, and which are required of us in common with 
others ; and it would be a manifest dereliction of duty, 
to refuse to perform such acts, under a pretense of wait- 
ing for a sufficient call thereto. 

"Through the prejudice of a corrupt education, and 
the influence of a traditional religion, manv have adopted 
the sentiment, that, let Scripture, reason, and common 
sense say what they will, in regard to what constitutes 
those duties, it is wrong to undertake to perform any- 
thing of the kind, without first waiting for and receiving 
a special Divine impulse. Such sentiments being pub- 
licly advocated by Ministers of the Society of Friends, 
has for a considerable time past stood as a reproach 
against it. And having taken a position in which we 
can now testify against them, we wish to make this testi- 
mony known to the world, being assured that they have 
emanated from the grand adversary of man's happiness, 
and are calculated only to hinder the progress of the 
cause of truth and righteousness in the earth. The es- 
pecial, supernatural and direct communication of the 
Divine will to man. is necessarily made, only when the 



190 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

existing means whereby this knowledge in some respects 
may be attained, are not adequate for the purpose. To 
take any other view of the subject, would be virtually to 
impeach the Almighty's attributes of boundless wisdom 
and perfection. And we apprehend that every honest, 
intelligent and reflecting mind must admit that it would 
be criminal in the highest degree, in many instances 
which might and do frequently occur, to wait or hesitate 
a moment to act ; for instance, to rescue a brother or 
sister from certain death or imminent danger. And 
why would it be criminal ? Without question, because 
his sense of what is right, would assure him of his duty 
to act instantaneously for his brother's preservation. If, 
therefore, this knowledge is adequate to the purpose, 
would it not be derogatory to the character of the All- 
wise Creator of the universe, to suppose he has required 
us to wait for some more extraordinary manifestation in 
regard to his will in all similar circumstances ? It is 
therefore when duties are of such a character as are not, 
and cannot be ascertained through those means, to be 
such, that they are manifested so to be by the special re- 
velation of the Spirit of God. This doctrine is fully con- 
firmed, not only by the sentiments of our forefathers in 
the Church, but by that which is better authority, the 
sacred volume of inspiration. It is a declaration of an 
eminent apostle, that ' he that knoweth to do good, and 
doeth it not, to him it is sin. 5 Now, as it is incontro- 
vertible that, in regard to all the social and general duties 
of life, we may know what is good and what is required 
of us, without this special communication of the will of 
God ; it is therefore evident from this scripture author- 
ity, that he who neglects to do that which he thus knows 
to be his duty, without this extraordinary manifestation, 
under a pretense of waiting for an immediate call, is in 
the commission of sin. 

" In regard to this subject, William Penn observes, 
; we have a call to do good as often as we have the 
power and occasion.' Hence, it is evident, in the opin- 
ion of this great man, whenever we have the ability, an 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 191 

occasion constitutes the only necessary call to perform 
every moral and social duty. 

" Another charge which is constantly being preferred 
against us is, that we are opposed to the Church govern- 
ment and discipline of the Society of Friends. 

u In treating upon this subject, it will be necessary to 
inquire into the character of this government as origin- 
ally instituted. Barclay, in his Anarchy of the Ranters, 
declares that no decision or decree of the church is avail- 
able, without the aid of the power and Spirit of God 
leading thereto. 

" Hence, it is obvious that true subordination to the 
Church, according to original principle, consists in sub- 
mission to those decrees only, which are made under the 
influence of the Holy Spirit. But some of our accusers, 
when endeavoring to fasten the charge of insubordina- 
tion upon us, have taken the ground that no decision or 
decree of the Church can be made but what should be 
available ; that it is the duty of its members to submit 
thereto, if they know it to be wrong. Who cannot see 
that this doctrine is calculated to uphold the greatest 
abominations in the Church, and to prevent it, when the 
rulers may have become corrupt, from ever being reformed 
without some miraculous interposition, by which they 
should all become renovated at once ! 

" It is the judgment of Truth alone, to which, by the 
church government* of the Society (which has alwa} T s 
been acknowledged,) its members are bound to be in sub- 
ordination ; and hence, a majority being in favor of a 
particular measure, is no certain evidence that that mea- 
sure is right. Now, as this judgment is to be arrived at 
through the application of the means, and by attending 
to the gifts which the great Head of the Church has con- 
ferred upon it, in order for the attainment of the object, 
whether they be the Scriptures, reason and reflection, or 
the special revelation of the Holy Spirit, according as 
the nature of the case may demand one or the other of 
these, or the whole of them, it follows as a matter of 
course, that even if the majority should neglect or reject 



192 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

the appropriate means by which this true judgment is to 
be arrived at, that this majority is, in the true and legiti- 
mate sense of the term, the insubordinate part of society. 

" In conclusion, we would make use of this opportu- 
nity to declare, that we firmly believe in the doctrine of 
immediate revelation, as held by the Society in its pris- 
tine purity, and that w T e have never held any other view 
whatever in regard to the matter. 

" And, in regard to the ministry of the Gospel, we be- 
lieve that the same call and qualification for the work, 
w T hich was formerly requisite, is now as necessary as in 
any age of the world, that the Gospel which the true 
minister of Christ communicates to the people, is not re- 
ceived of man, neither is he taught it, but by the revela- 
tion of Jesus Christ. 

" Signed on behalf of the Yearly Meeting of Anti- 
Slavery Friends, held at Newport, Ind., by adjournments 
from the 4th to the 9th of the Ninth month, 1843. 

" Walter Edgerton, Clerk" 



CHAPTER XYI. 

Address of the Indiana Yearly Meeting to the Christian Professors, etc. 

The Yearly Meeting, held at White Water, also issued 
a document this year, on the subject of Slavery ; but a 
portion of it having allusion to the matter of difficulty, 
was of such a character, that the Meeting for Sufferings 
of Anti-Slavery Friends, in the Eleventh montli follow- 
ing, thought proper to review it. I will present the 
reader with both documents. 



"ADDRESS 

" Of the Society of Friends of Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
to the Christian Professors in the United States, and 
to the Citizens generally. 

"It is with feelings of religious concern for the ad- 
vancement of the kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 193 

Christ, and for the welfare of our beloved country, that 
we believe ourselves called to address you on the subject 
of Slavery ; a subject which essentially involves the peace 
and happiness of the citizens of these United States, and 
which claims their most serious consideration, and their 
prompt and persevering exertions for its termination. 

" We believe there are many in all the Christian de- 
nominations, who, with ourselves, deplore the existence 
of this system of iniquity and oppression, and who long 
for its extinction. For the encouragement and strength, 
ot such, we would state, that about eighty years ago, a 
weighty concern came upon the Society of Friends, re- 
specting the Slave trade, and the participation of their 
members in the practice of holding in bondage their fel- 
low-men of the African race. Under the conviction that 
our Almighty Creator made of one blood, all the nations 
of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and that the 
enjoyment of life, liberty and happiness, is the natural 
inherent right of all, they became convinced, through the 
influence of the Holy Spirit on their hearts, that, consist- 
ent with the spirit and precepts of our holy Redeemer, 
which teaches us to do to others all things whatsoever we 
would they should do to us, no man possesses the right 
to hold his fellow-man in unconditional bondage. 

"When this righteous concern to abolish slave-holding 
amongst themselves first arose, many obstacles to its 
prosecution presented, and continued for several years to 
impede its progress ; but keeping to the ground of reli- 
gious duty, and submitting the cause to their Lord and 
Master, to whom they looked for wisdom and direction, 
and who alone could soften the hearts of those who per- 
sisted in asserting the right to retain their slaves, a num- 
ber of enlightened and devoted men labored faithfully 
with these, to convince them of the injustice of the prac- 
tice. Notwithstanding the various discouragements with 
which they had to contend, the way was finally opened 
through His blessing, who laid this duty upon them, for 
the entire extinction of Slavery within the limits of our 
religious society, and having cleared itself of Slavery, it 



194 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

was prepared to raise an availing testimony against slave- 
holding among others. 

"After liberating their slaves, Friends proceeded to 
remunerate those who had served their masters at an age 
entitling them to the proceeds of their services, making 
such compensation in very many instances, for their labor, 
as justice dictated. They also extended a parental care 
over them, providing schools for their literary instruction, 
frequently holding religious meetings with them, and 
ministering to the wants of the aged and indigent. When 
the work of emancipation was thus generally effected, 
they adopted rules in their Discipline against buying, 
selling, holding and hiring slaves ; and the few members 
who stood out in opposition to the decisions of the body 
were, after being labored with to recover them from their 
error, disowned, and the Society has ever since continued 
to deny, church membership to those who violate the Dis- 
cipline in these respects. 

u Having liberated their slaves, Friends then felt reli- 
giously engaged from time to time, under the constraining 
power of Divine love, to urge upon their fellow-citizens, 
both privately and publicly, the obligation which they 
were under to accord to the enslaved African and his de- 
scendants, the inalienable right to freedom. Memorials, 
petitions and addresses were frequently presented to Con- 
gress, to various Legislative bodies in the slave States, 
and to the public, for the purpose of promoting this desi- 
rable object. While their language was plain and une- 
quivocal, these documents were always respectful and 
pacific in their character. Expressions calculated to ex- 
asperate the slaveholder, or to excite to violence and 
insurrection on the part of the slave — as they would be 
repugnant to the benign spirit of the Gospel, and militate 
against the object in view, were carefully avoided. To 
convince the master of the injustice of the system, and 
the degradation and suffering which it inflicted on the 
slave, and thus induce him voluntarily to break the yoke 
and let the oppressed go free, was the design, and in 
many cases the effect of their labors. By their judicious 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 195 

proceedings, the way was opened in the minds of slave- 
holders to hear the pleadings of Friends on behalf of the 
poor negro ; and had this temperate and Christian spirit 
been kept too by all those who have stepped forth pro- 
fessedly to advocate his rights, we apprehend, the cause 
of freedom would have made far greater progress than it 
has — there would be less sensitiveness on this subject in 
the mind of the master than now exists, and consequently 
a fairer prospect that this opprobrium of the Christian 
name, would soon be banished from our favored land. 

"While we have been endeavoring to advance our tes- 
timony against Slavery, in our own peaceable way, and 
as we were favored with the leadings of the Spirit of 
Truth ; we have been accused of apathy, and negligence, 
and even of giving countenance to the system itself, be- 
cause we could not consistently with our own convictions 
of duty, unite with some measures which others thought 
proper to adopt. But how much better would it be, if 
those who profess to be opposed to Slavery were to bring 
their testimony to bear upon the system itself, rather than 
waste their strength and influence by publishing crimina- 
tions against others ! And though some who have sece- 
ded from this Yearly Meeting, and assumed the designa- 
tion of Anti-Slavery Friends, as if they were the chief 
defenders of the rights of the colored man, have joined 
in with those unfounded accusations, for whose proceed- 
ings and publications we are no longer responsible, yet 
our abhorrence of the system of Slavery, with all its 
dreadful consequences, remains undiminished, and we not 
only continue as the way opens, to lift up our voice for 
the dumb, but rejoice in the efforts which our brethren of 
other religious persuasions are making in the same cause 3 
under the influence of the same Christian spirit. 

"It is this spirit that can soften the hard heart, break 
every yoke, and proclaim liberty to the captive, and set 
the oppressed free ; and we would invite the members of 
the different religious societies to endeavor, under its 
blessed influence, to eradicate Slavery from their respect- 
ive churches. Let those who see the magnitude of the 



196 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 

evil, and whose hands are clear of it, labor steadfastly 
and faithfully with their members who have slaves, to 
dissuade them from the practice. And may we not hope 
that their patient labors in gospel love, would be greatly 
instrumental, if not completely successful, in bringing 
about the peaceful termination of this enormous evil in 
our favored country! Were all the professors of the 
Christian religion, in these United States, clear of hold- 
ing their fellow-men in bondage, the system, being prac- 
tically condemned by the religious part of the community, 
we apprehend would soon fall to the ground. That it is 
the will of the Great Head of the Church, that all those 
who name the name of Christ should depart from iniquity, 
and wash their hands in innocency respecting this evil, 
we can have no doubt. Christ loved the Church and 
gave himself for it, that he might present it to himself a 
glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any 
such thing; but that it should be holy and without blem- 
ish. Is not Slavery, at this day of light and knowledge, 
a dark spot and blemish in the visible Church, which 
must contribute to lay waste its character as the Church 
of Christ, and to retard the spreading of His kingdom in 
the earth ? 

"Have we not reason to believe that this system of 
iniquity, upheld by many who call themselves Christians, 
and some of them standing in the character of ministers 
of the gospel of peace and salvation, is hanging over us 
as a dark cloud, and is one of the great causes of the dif- 
ficulties to which the country is subjected ? Can we ex- 
pect the smiles of Divine Providence to be continued 
upon us and upon our country unless we break off our 
sins by righteousness, and our iniquities by showing 
mercy to the poor despised slave ? It appears to us, that 
under the blessings of our heavenly Father, the peaceful 
abolition of Slavery by the slave States, very much de- 
pends upon the exertions and influence of those who act 
on Christian principle, with steady and unyielding firm- 
ness for its removal. There is, therefore, we believe, 
great responsibility resting upon professing Christians in 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 197 

relation to this deeply affecting subject, and we desire 
that our brethren may not slumber at their posts while 
the enemy is within their borders, but, relying for wisdom 
and strength upon the Head of the Church, labor in the 
ability which He would grant to put away this sin from 
among them. Thus they would not only receive the 
reward of peace in their own bosoms, but be the happy 
instruments of releasing their brethren from the crime 
and the curse of Slavery, purifying the Church from this 
defilement, and exalting the standard of universal right- 
eousness in the earth. 

u In that love which breathes glory to God in the high- 
est, peace on earth and good-will to men, we would also 
commend to the serious reflection of the slaveholders the 
accumulated guilt of oppression, and their fearful respon- 
sibility in subjecting to the debasing consequences of this 
system, human beings possessing, as themselves, immortal 
souls to be saved or lost, for whom Christ died, not that 
they should be plunged in pollution, but that they should 
be redeemed from all iniquity and serve him in newness 
of life. Deeply impressed with the inestimable value of 
human souls, our accountability to our Creator for the 
deeds done in the body, the shortness of time, and the 
awfulness of eternity — that all earthly things pass away 
as the morning cloud, or the early dew, and that all the 
wealth and honors of the world are only as vanity and 
vexation of spirit, we look with feelings of deep concern 
and interest, on that portion of our fellow-men, who still 
adhere to the system and practice of Slavery, with earnest 
desires that they may take the subject more closely into 
consideration ; and may the Lord grant to them the light 
of his Holy Spirit, to see the fearfulness of their stand- 
ing, and strength to perform his whole will concerning 
them. 

"In thus addressing our fellow-citizens on this mo- 
mentous subject, we trust we shall not be suspected of 
party or political motives, for although our religious So- 
ciety, in its official capacity, takes no part in the political 
operations going on in the country, we feel a deep and 

9* 



198 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

lively interest in the welfare of the nation. It is only as 
the people comply with the Divine requisition to do 
justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with God, that we 
can reasonably hope for the Divine blessing in preserving 
us in harmony, peace and prosperity. Our religious so- 
ciety cannot give countenance to measures of confusion 
and violence to attain any object whatever, for our testi- 
mony against war is equally decisive as that against 
Slavery ; and as we cannot resort to force or resistance 
to the law of the land to obtain or defend our own most 
valued rights, so neither can we do it for those of others ; 
we believe it is our religious duty to live in active or 
passive subordination to the government placed over us. 

"In conclusion, we fervently desire that all those who 
are implicated in the system of slave-holding, may stand 
open to the convictions of the Spirit of Truth in their own 
hearts, which, during the day of mercy, pleads with all, 
to save them from their sins ; that by obeying its dictates 
they may faithfully do their duty in setting their slaves 
free from bondage. Were this mass of corruption and 
iniquity removed from our beloved country, it would be 
the opening of a new and joyful day, in which the ancient 
prediction would be in measure realized : ' Then shall thy 
righteousness go forth with brightness, and thy salvation 
as a lamp that burnetii.' May all those who love the 
Lord Jesus Christ, and desire the exaltation of his name 
and dominion over all, be united in the spirit of prayer to 
the God and Father of our sure mercies, that He will con- 
tinue his forbearance and long-suffering toward our 
guilty land, and through the workings of his mighty 
power, change the heart of the slaveholder, and give de- 
liverance to his oppressed and trodden-down children, 
who are groaning under bondage. 

" Signed by direction and on behalf of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting of Friends, held at White Water, in Wayne 
County, Indiana, by adjournments from the 28th day of 
Ninth month to the 3d day of Tenth month, inclusive, 
1843. 

"Elijah Coffin, ClerkP 



INDIANA YEAELY MEETING OF FRIENDS. !;199 



CHAPTER XVII. 

" Review of an 'Address of the Society of Friends of Indiana Yearly Meet- 
ing to the Christian Professors in the United States, and to the Citi- 
zens generally, on the subject of Slavery/ ' 

" It is not for the sake of controversy, nor for the pur- 
pose of injuring the character or destroying the influence 
of the above-named Address, so far as it may have any 
influence to promote any Anti-Slavery feeling in the 
community, but believing as we do, that it is well calcu- 
lated to mislead the unwary and to militate against the 
progress of the present Anti-Slavery enterprise by insin- 
uations against the measures of its advocates ; and believ- 
ing also that on the success of this enterprise, as the 
means in the hands of Divine Providence, hang the hopes 
of the advocates of human rights for the peaceful termi- 
nation of Slavery and the preservation of our country 
from the judgments of offended Heaven, we feel con- 
cerned to notice a few expressions contained in the 
Address in connection with the attending circumstances. 

"We would by no means undervalue the Anti-Slavery 
labors of our ancestors. We believe they performed a 
great and a glorious work in clearing the Society of 
Slavery. They also did much to turn the attention of 
others to the subject; and it is, probably, to the influence 
of their labors, more than to any other means, that the 
present Anti-Slavery organizations owe their origin; and 
it grieves us to the heart to think that, after the example 
and precepts of our fathers in the Church have induced 
many philanthropists of all denominations to engage in 
the work, their successors should pursue such a course 
and assume such a bearing toward those laborers as in a 
great measure to destroy their influence. The authors of 
the Address tell us of the labors of the Society in this 
cause from the commencement of the concern, eighty 
years ago (we think they might have dated it some further 
back), down to the present time. Now, much as we 
value the faithful labors of Friends formerly, and honor 



200 SlSTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

them for their good works, we do not wish to overrate 
them. We do not claim for them infallibility, or that 
they did, in all things, the very best that might have 
been done. Neither do we believe that the Society, of 
late years, has acted faithfully in the cause according to 
the example of their ancestors. 

■' Speaking of the past labors of Friends on this sub- 
ject, they say, ' Notwithstanding the various discourage- 
ments with which they had to contend, the way was 
finally opened through His blessing who laid this duty 
upon them, for the entire extinction of Slavery" within 
the limits of our religious society; and having cleared 
itself of Slavery, it was prepared to raise an availing 
testimony against slave-holding among others.' Are we 
here to infer that they mean to say the continuation of 
Slavery in the Society of Friends for one hundred years 
before the ; weighty concern, 5 they speak of, ' came upon 
the Society, 5 and for many years afterward, was in conse- 
quence of the withholding of the Divine blessing in 
opening the way? If this is their meaning — if this is 
what they mean by saying, ' The way was finally opened, 5 
we would say, in reply, we do not believe it was ever 
shut. We do not believe there was ever a time when 
Friends might not have abandoned this sin, if they 
would ; neither can we allow that, if they had faithfully 
and in all things, followed the teachings of that Holy 
Spirit they make so much profession of being guided by, 
Slavery would ever have gained a foothold in the Soci- 
ety ; much less have remained in it more than a century, 

u We do not believe in the truth of the doctrine, that 
way does not open at all times for the leaving off of sin- 
ful practices, if we are disposed to do so. And none will 
be held innocent in the continuation of, or connivance at, 
known sins, under the plea that ' the Lord's time is the right 
time, 5 and c the Lord will abolish it in his own time and 
way. 5 We believe the Lord 5 s time for wickedness to be 
abandoned is immediately ; it is not his will that indivi- 
duals, or societies, or nations should continue in sin, day 
after day and year after year, waiting for the Lord 5 s time to 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 201 

come — for Him to ' open the way' — to c abolish the evil 
in his own time and in his own way. 5 If they do — if 
they resist the Lord's long-continued mercy under such a 
fallacious pretense, ' His time icill come in which He will 
accomplish the work,' and it may be, in the language 
of John Woolman, ' by visiting them with terrible 
things in righteousness. We do not mean to be under- 
stood as saying that the above doctrine of waiting for the 
Lord to do the work in his own time and way, is literally 
advocated in the Address, or that the words of that im- 
port, used above as quotations, are found there, but we 
do say, that this sentiment and these expressions are in 
common use among all classes of the body that issued 
the Address, and that they are almost constantly used to 
discourage the active labors of the Abolitionists, and they 
are introduced here for the purpose of arriving at a better 
understanding of what they mean by saying that ' the 
way was finally opened through his blessing, who laid 
the duty upon them, for the entire extinction of Slavery 
within the limits of our religious society.' This expres- 
sion, especially when viewed in connection with a know- 
ledge of the use of the argument above referred to, seems 
to us to imply that the Lord's time had not previously 
come — that the way had been closed, and that Friends 
could not, until the time spoken of, abandon the practice 
of slave-holding, and that consequently, prior to that 
time, slave-holding in the Society was not sin. If any 
should charge us with doing them injustice in this 
matter, let them show that this is not the unavoidable 
result — the sum and substance of their own arguments. 

" We regard this as a most dangerous doctrine, in the 
application which many of them make of it, to this ques- 
tion. Look at its consequences. Slavery cannot be 
abolished till the way opens — the waj T cannot open till 
the Lord's time come — when the Lord's time shall come 
Slavery will be abolished. Then as Slavery is not abo- 
lished, the way is not open, the Lord's time is not yet 
come. Consequently its existence, at the present time, 
is not contrary to his will, and cannot be sin, for what- 



202 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

ever is not contrary to his will cannot be sin. And as it 
cannot be sinful till the way opens for its abolition, which 
will be in the Lord's time, and as he will then abolish it 
in his own way, it follows that Slavery never has been 
and never can be a sin. If this is true of Slavery, it is 
true of every other practice, and it follows again, that 
there can be no such thing as sin in the world, and all 
the labor of Friends to show the moral turpitude of 
Slavery, is vain. We know they will recoil at these con- 
clusions, but they are the legitimate conclusions drawn 
from their own premises. We have no wish to expose 
our friends, for the sake of the exposure or for the pur- 
pose of injuring them; but we wish to defend the Truth, 
and in so doing, it becomes necessary for us to expose 
the fearful errors into w T hich they have been betrayed in 
their anxiety to oppose the labors of the Abolitionists, 
and particularly of A. S. Friends, both before and since 
their separation. Let it be understood that we do not 
charge them with wishing to perpetuate Slavery ; on the 
contrary, we doubt not that most of them desire its ter- 
mination, notwithstanding their present anomalous posi- 
tion, wherein they exert a powerful Pro-Slavery influ- 
ence, by throwing themselves in the way and obstructing 
the progress of the labors of the great host of philanthro- 
pists who have been raised up and are now pleading the 
cause of immediate and unconditional emancipation. 

" If it be asked, if we do not believe the Anti-Slavery 
sentiments contained in the Address are the sentiments 
of the meeting? We have no doubt but they are, of the 
members generally, and were it not for the influence of a 
few leading characters, the great majority might have 
been in the Anti-Slavery ranks — in full unity with 
modern Abolitionism. 

"That they (that is, the ruling influences) stand 
opposed to the present Anti-Slavery organizations, is evi- 
dent from all their proceedings on this subject, ample 
proof of which has been given in documents heretofore 
issued from the Anti-Slavery press ; it is shown pretty 
clearly in the document before us, in the various allu- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 203 

sions to their own excellent method of doing the business, 
indirectly charging the contrary upon others. They 
speak of their own ' peaceable way,' ' keeping to the 
ground of religious duty,' ^Friends then religiously en- 
gaged,' ' these documents were always respectful and 
pacific in their character.' 'Expressions calculated to 
exasperate the slaveholders, or to excite to violence and 
insurrection were carefully avoided.' 'By their judi- 
cious proceedings the way was opened,' 'as we were 
favored with the leadings of the Spirit of Truth.' 'Our 
religious society cannot give countenance to measures of 
confusion and violence to obtain any object whatever, for 
our testimony against war is equally decisive as that 
against Slavery, and as we cannot resort to force or re- 
sistance to the laws of the land to obtain our own most 
valued rights, so neither can we do it for those of others.' 
That all these are so many indirect charges against the 
Abolitionists of contrary principles and conduct, is so 
manifest that it seems to need no proof: but if any be 
required, it may be found in the same document in these 
words: 'Had this temperate and Christian spirit been 
kept to by all those who have stepped forth professedly 
to vindicate his (the slave's) rights, we apprehend that 
the cause of freedom would have made far greater pro- 
gress than it has.' The persons here alluded to must 
include at least a very large portion of the Abolitionists, 
as a small number could not be supposed to have so 
greatly retarded the progress of freedom. In short, this 
is but another edition of the old story that Abolitionists 
have put back emancipation fifty years. 

"We fully believe that, as they say, Friends, after 
'having liberated their slaves, felt religiously engaged, 
from time to time, under the constraining power of 
Divine love, to urge upon their fellow-citizens, both pri- 
vately and publicly, the obligations which they were 
under to accord to the enslaved African and his descend- 
ants, the inalienable right to freedom.' And we know 
that when any of their fellow-citizens became prepared 
to labor in the same cause, Friends did not turn from 



204: HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

them and affect so much superiority and self-sufficiency 
as to refuse them as co-workers. They freely and cor- 
dially united with them in the promotion of the work, 
not only to convince the slaveholders of their error, but 
to promote political action, in order that the iniquitous 
system might be abolished by law. No, they did not 
think it necessary to clear themselves of ' political mo- 
tives,' like our modern Friends, for in those days of plain 
common sense, it seems to have been the opinion of all 
the friends of the slave, that political action was the 
necessary and legitimate result of a correct public senti- 
ment induced by moral suasion, and the proper means of 
ridding the country of Slavery. And the idea, that 
political action for its removal was inconsistent with a 
religious testimony against it, does not seem to have 
entered their minds ; and none but those who adopt the 
doctrine of the inconsistency of political action for the 
removal of any evil, can with any consistency entertain 
the idea for one moment. They would not be ' suspected 
of party or political motives,' in addressing the commu- 
nity on the subject of Slavery. No, indeed ! for ' they 
feel a deep and lively interest in the welfare of the 
nation.' Plainly insinuating that the welfare of the 
nation would be injured by political action in favor of 
liberty. Is this like the conduct of our early laborers in 
the cause? most certainly not. And w 7 hy should it be 
thought that ; political motives,' w T ith a view to the remo- 
val of the great evil of Slavery, is more inconsistent or 
improper than for the removal of any other moral and 
physical evil? Will it be said that a concern to suppress 
or prevent crime is not a religious concern ? Or that it 
is not the legitimate object of political action to protect 
the rights of the people against the encroachments of 
oppression, and to promote their welfare both morally 
and physically ? If we dare not entertain political mo- 
tives, and resort to political action for the removal of this 
greatest of all the moral and political evils that afflict our 
country, then we dare not for the removal of any other 
evil, then it is no wonder that politics are corrupt : and 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 205 

we have no doubt but this view of the subject, that the 
removal of moral evils and the promotion of virtue are 
religious concerns, and would be ruined by being brought 
into" politics, has done much to render the policies of the 
nation corrupt and wicked. 

" The authors of the Address say : ; Our religious so- 
ciety in its official capacity, takes no part in the political 
operations going on in the country. 5 Although this 
may be true, yet it is too well known to need proof, that 
the members generally do. They are not so fearful of 
1 political motives,' as some may think. And their de- 
votion to the Whig party, and sympathy with it, is so 
apparent, that it is difficult to believe they were not mis- 
taken, when they supposed they were not influenced by 
1 political or party motives,' in issuing at least, this part 
of their Address. They were not influenced by motives 
of political abolition ; but was there not a political motive 
in making this declaration ! Was it not made chiefly for 
the purpose of satisfying a certain class of politicians, 
whose feelings seem to be so nearly parallel with theirs, 
as exhibited by public demonstrations on both sides? 
For it is well known, that Friends generally support the 
Whig party, and that the most popular Whig presses, in 
return, defend and eulogize them. That Friends are not 
afraid of political action when it suits them, and as an 
evidence of their devotion to the Whig party, it may be 
stated, that many of their active members attend and take 
an active part in Whig Conventions, held to promote the 
election of a slaveholder to the Presidency of the United 
States ; and some years ago, previous to a Presidential 
election, the subject was introduced into the Meeting for 
Sufferings, and the conclusion come to, that Friends 
should be advised to vote the Whig ticket. This was 
certainly very nearly ' in its official capacity, though the 
subject was not minuted.' 

" From all these circumstances, taken in connection 
with the language of the Address, we are bound to be- 
lieve, that so far from not being influenced by political 
motives, they were among the leading objects in view, in 

10 



206 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

issuing the Address, and in a particular manner that part 
of it disclaiming political motives. 

" The sentiment expressed by them, that it would be 
much better, ' if those who profess to be opposed to 
Slavery, were to bring their testimony to bear upon the 
system itself, rather than waste their strength and influ- 
ence by publishing criminations against others,' is cer- 
tainly deserving their own serious attention. They first 
endeavored to criminate the Abolitionists, and opposed 
them in various ways, and then, in their own defense, and 
for the clearing the cause from reproach, the Abolitionists 
were under the necessity of meeting those criminations 
and that opposition, in such a way as to correct the false 
impressions they might otherwise make upon the public 
mind; and we can see no inducement that Abolitionists 
could have to speak evil of Friends, if they had not 
acted toward them in a manner very different from the 
course pursued by Friends formerly toward the Aboli- 
tionists of their day. We know of no criminations 
against them but what are well founded. With respect 
to the insinuation, that Anti-Slavery Friends consider 
themselves the chief defenders of the rights of the colored 
man, it is perfectly unfounded, but at the same time per- 
fectly natural, coming from a people so jealous as they 
have manifested themselves to be; for we have no doubt 
but that a desire to have the honor of being the chief 
means of abolishing Slavery, has been one great cause 
of their opposition to those, who, while they (that is 
Friends) were sleeping over the wrongs of the slave, 
had got far ahead of them. We claim no such honor; 
we do not wish to be considered ' the chief defenders of 
the rights of the colored man. 5 We wish to do our duty. 
We desire to see the slave liberated, and our country 
freed from the curse of Slavery, but as to the honor that 
may accrue in this world, our opposers may share it 
among themselves, if they can. 

" What object they had in view, in disclaiming force 
and violence on their part, or in declaring that they 
could not resort to force or resistance to obtain or defend 



INDIANA tEARLt MEETING- Ofr F&IEttDS. 207 

their own rights, or those of others, we cannot conceive (as 
their principles are well known in these respects),unless 
it be an indirect charge upon the Abolitionists of practic- 
ing contrary thereto ; and this, we doubt not, was the case* 
We regard this, together with all their other insinuations 
of the kind, as a poor and pitiful attempt to confirm the 
prejudices of the community against the Abolitionists, 
and as unworthy of any further notice, except merely to 
say, that the confusion and violence attendant upon the 
A. S. enterprise has been created by the opposition, and 
that the responsibility rests with ponderous weight upon 
themselves* 

" They say, ' We believe it is our religious duty to 
live in active or passive subordination to the government 
placed over us.' If they mean by this, that it is wrong 
to do aught which the law of the land forbids, we pro- 
test against such doctrine as antichristian, and contrary 
to the conduct of the faithful in various ages. 

" We would observe, that whatever other object the 
leaders had in view, in issuing the Address, these two 
appear to have been prominent. 1st. To satisfy distant 
Friends that they are bearing a testimony against Slavery, 
and thus secure their confidence and unity ; and 2d, to 
; retain their place and influence with the rulers of the 
land, 5 and particularly with the Whigs, by their insinua- 
tions against the Abolitionists, and disavowal of political 
motives. In short, they prove themselves to be just 
such Anti-Slavery men as the mass of the people ; op- 
posed to Slavery, and at the same time opposed to the 
Abolitionists. And as to the petitions and memorials 
they speak of, we think of latter days, they have been 
few and far between, and when they have been sent, 
pains have been taken to let it be known that the peti- 
tioners were not modern Abolitionists, and had nothing 
to do with them. And further, we believe it cannot be 
shown that Indiana Yearly Meeting has ever petitioned 
government for the abolition of Slavery anywhere, or at 
any time, immediately or prospective, or that the Society 



08 SIStOBY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

anywhere in the United States has ever petitioned ex- 
plicitly for its immediate abolition. 

" In conclusion, we would say to our Friends of the 
Old Yearly Meeting, ; Ye cannot serve two masters. 5 
Ye cannot serve the Anti-Slavery cause, and retain a 
popular standing with the slaveholders and a slave- 
holding community. Therefore choose ye whom ye will 
serve. 

" Signed on behalf of the Meeting for Sufferings of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends, Elev- 
enth month 30th, 1843. 

Benjamin Stanton, Cleric, 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

The Epistles issued by the Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, unnoticed 
by other Yearly Meetings, except London — Letter to the Editors of 
the ' British Friend/ by Elijah Coffin and others of Richmond. 

It appears that the Epistles addressed to the different 
Yearly Meetings, at the time of the re-organization, 
were not so much as read publicly ; and no one of the 
Yearly Meetings designed to pay so much attention to 
the matter as to send any official account_of having re- 
ceived anything of the kind, but that of London. The 
account from it, it seems, was forwarded to the Yearly 
Meeting in Ninth month, this year, but did not reach in 
time for the meeting. 

It ought here to be observed, that notwithstanding 
London Yearly Meeting rejected the Address of the 
newly organized Yearly Meeting, and its overtures of 
paternal correspondence, there was a number of warm- 
hearted, consistent Anti-Slavery Friends in that body, 
who, it seems, could not be induced to justify the wrong 
for the sake of popular favor — who could not find it in 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 209 

their hearts to censure the few for having labored in the 
Anti-Slavery cause, in the same manner the most emi- 
nent Friends in their own Yearly Meeting had done, be- 
cause they had been condemned by the many in Indiana, 
who opposed such labor. 

Among these, were Wm. and Robert Smeal, editors of 
the ; British Friend. 5 Those editors copied the Declara- 
tion and a part of the Minutes of the Yearly Meeting of 
Anti-Slavery Friends into their paper, and sent them 
forth to the world, without casting a censure upon their 
authors. This, it seems, was rather too keen a rebuke 
to be borne in silence by the opposing party. 

Accordingly, five of their number, two of whom were 
known to be about at the head of that party, addressed 
the editors in the following manner and style : 

" To the Editors of the c British Friend? 

"Richmond, Ixd., Eighth month 15th, 1843, 

u Respected Friends. — We have been favored by a 
friend, with the perusal of a number of your paper, 
issued under date of Fifth month 31st, 1843, the first 
number of the paper that we have seen, and the only 
one that we know of in this part of the country. We 
perceive that you copy a part of the Minutes, and the 
whole of the Declaration of the seceders from our so- 
ciety, within the limits of this Yearly Meeting, who 
style themselves ' Anti-Slavery Friends.' Also, a letter, 
addressed by Benjamin Stanton, H. H. Way, and Daniel 
Puckett, three of the principal seceders, to James Cann- 
ings Fuller, dated Third month 31st, 1813. You more- 
over make some editorial remarks in relation to the 
1 Indiana Separation, and the Anti-Slavery cause, 5 to all 
of which, we have given attention with feelings of in- 
terest. 

" These documents, together with your remarks, take 
up more than ten columns in your paper, without one 
single paragraph in all the paper to counteract the preju- 
dicial and pernicious tendency of all this matter from 



210 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

the seceders. In reflecting on the subject, feelings of 
sorrow have attended our minds, while anticipating the 
injury the circulation of such matter uncontradicted, may 
possibly have with English people, and English Friends, 
published as it is, with sympathy for the seceders against 
the solemn acts, the religious professions, and the religious 
character of one of the largest Yearly Meetings of 
Friends in the world. Hence, even at this late period, 
Eighth month 15th, two-and-a-half months after the 
publication of the paper referred to, and notwithstanding 
other later numbers may contain sufficient balancing 
matter, we think it a duty, though apparently out of 
season, to address you a few lines on the subject in gen- 
eral, more particularly, as your paper professes to be 
mainly devoted to the interests of our religious society. 

" With their Minutes and Declaration we have very 
little to do ; the last-named document contains so much 
error, misrepresentation, and false coloring, and has been 
written in feeling so evidently bad, toward our religious 
society, not only in this Yearly Meeting, but in America 
in general, that it would take much time and writing 
effectually to expose all ; and a thick controversial pam- 
phlet would be the result. We refer you to a Review of 
the Declaration, herewith sent you, written in a concise 
and mild manner, the accuracy of which is undoubted 
by us. The Declaration, and the paper called the ' Free 
Labor Advocate/ in which it was originally published, 
are considered by Friends here, decidedly pernicious, on 
account of their containing so much matter, not only 
erroneous in itself, but which, if read and believed, would 
have a tendency to alienate Friends one from another, 
and from the Church, and the Truth, contrary to the ad- 
vice of our Yearly Meeting. Among the many mis- 
takes contained in the Declaration, no one would seem 
wider of the mark, than the conclusion which is come to, 
after much laborious argument, that Friends in this 
country are favorable to Slavery (see British Friend, p. 
70, third column). 

" If this were true, we should not be surprised that 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 211 

you on the other side of the water, should sympathize 
with them. But we are confident that it is not true : 
and we are happy to believe, that no system of false 
reasoning or foul report can make it so. Friends here, 
entertain a warm and decisive Anti-Slavery feeling ; and 
they have shown it in various acts ; they are contin- 
ually exercising it ; and as Truth may open the way, will 
we hope, be faithful still to continue to make it appear. 
And there is reason to believe, that their way will be 
much cleared, by the absence of those, who, departing 
from our well-known principles, are zealous to go to 
work, without waiting to know and feel the sanctifying 
power and authority of the Holy Spirit, without which, 
we must expect that all our society proceedings will be 
utterly fruitless of good. 

" If you have seen the Epistle of our Meeting for Suf- 
ferings to our subordinate meetings and members (a copy 
of which we will send you herewith,) you know that 
various charges contained in the Declaration, and other 
publications of theirs, such as, that our Yearly Meeting 
is opposing the Abolition of Slavery ', countenancing and 
supporting Slaveholders, Slave- holding 3 and Slavery, 
etc., etc., are pronounced to be false and unfounded. If 
you have not published this document, it may be right to 
publish it, clear of any remarks, notes, or comments of 
the seceders — let your readers have it fairly as an official 
document of our society. 

" The seceders have been very anxious, both before 
and since the Separation, to get themselves identified 
with Friends in England and Ireland. Hence, no efforts 
appear to have been spared, by writing letters, sending 
papers, documents, etc., to prejudice Friends abroad, 
and to enlist their sympathies in their favor. They warn 
you against being imposed upon by our representations, 
when we were making none (* a guilty conscience is its 
own accuser'). (See beginning of letter to J. C. Fuller.) 
They arrogate to themselves and their associates, the 
credit of being the only ones in the country engaged in 
the Anti-Slavery cause. They puff small matters into 



212 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

great consequence (such as Henry Clay's going to 
Friends' meeting one First-day, as he passed through this 
place), and endeavor to pervert them from any object 
meant or intended, or perhaps thought of, into a favorit- 
ism to Slavery, and desire of popularity with the world, 
etc., and claim entire fellowship and coincidence of ac- 
tion with Friends beyond the water. Even the sympathy 
expressed in the editorial of your paper, has been referred 
to, magnified and circulated with exultation — and pardon 
us, if we take this opportunity to say, in freedom, that 
circumstanced as you were, with none but their represen- 
tations before you, w r e believe you went too far in your 
sympathy. 

" You seem to admit in your editorial, that the only 
cause of Separation was Pro-Slavery on one part, and 
Anti-Slavery on the other, c having respect,' as you say, 
' solely to the abolition of Slavery,' etc. Whereas, we 
can say emphatically, and we hope, sincerely with you, 
that this ' cause has claimed the warmest sympathies of 
the Society since its origin,' sympathies which we still 
profess to entertain in a lively manner. In a valuable 
document on Slavery, lately issued by Philadelphia 
Yearly Meeting, speaking of the time when the Society 
cleared itself of the Slave-trade, etc., they say, ' from that 
period to the present time, the Society has continued to 
labor with diligence and perseverance in this righteous 
cause, endeavoring to enlighten the public mind, re- 
specting the enormities of the Slave-trade and Slavery, 
to prepare the way for the extinction of these foul blots 
upon the Christian name, and to ameliorate the condition 
of the free people of color.' To this statement we be- 
lieve the proceedings of the several American Yearly 
Meetings, particularly including those in the Southern 
slave States, w T ill bear ample witness, in opposition to 
the statements made in the Declaration, and from various 
other sources by the seceders. 

" In addition to the erroneous matter communicated in 
letters, such as that to J. C. Fuller, they have, where 
they have had the influence, made use of the Anti- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 213 

Slavery delegates who have gone to England, to propa- 
gate their errors. We have lately read in an American 
Anti-Slavery newspaper, a communication to your paper, 
by this same J. C. Fuller, in which our society in this 
land is shown out to great disadvantage. Such senti- 
ments as the following, in the letter to J. C. Fuller, now 
before us in your paper, will be looked upon with abhor- 
rence by Friends here : - It is a icell-known fact, that 
the influence of the Society of Friends in this country, 
is almost universally 'understood to he opposed to the 
Anti-Slavery enterprise.* By whom, it might be asked, 
is it so universally understood 1 By none, we believe, 
except the seceders, and those in their favor and under 
their influence, and those who have borrowed their ideas 
from them in their papers. Apart from the influence of 
those who are now, or have once been members of our 
religious society, we believe that the American Anti- 
Slavery Society, would have acknowledged the Society of 
Friends to be their forerunner and coadjutor in the Anti- 
Slavery cause: for we would rejoice in the progress of 
Anti-Slavery principles inculcated in the gospel spirit, 
either through that Society, or any other that has been, 
or may be engaged in the cause. 

"It may be asked, then, what have been the causes 
which have led to the Separation ? This is a subject we 
would touch with delicacy. Various circumstances, of 
course, have led to it. If you were among us, and fami- 
lar with the state of society, you would understand it 
better than it can be explained to you. They have come 
out with a long declaration of causes on their part, some, 
as we think, misrepresented ; some imaginary ; some in- 
applicable ; and all altogether insufficient to warrant such 
a procedure. The great weight, we think, lies at the 
door of a few of the leaders. A few of these once had 
considerable influence in our society. That influence, 
and the consequent authority connected with it, they 
seemed to wish to maintain; but when they had gone 
into extremes or errors, they were not willing to bend to 
good counsel. They had their adherents. And against 



214 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

admonition and brotherly exhortation, on one hand, were 
opposed their obstinacy, and the support of their party, 
on the other. Many young persons were led oft*, in a 
zeal just awakened, and apparently unhallowed ; but 
strongly inclined to burst forth in speech-making, etc., 
without the sanctifying power of godliness and experi- 
mental religion. Reverse the influence of one, two, or 
three persons, and there probably would have been very 
little trouble or contention, much less the setting up of a 
new altar within our limits. 

"''The cause is good? was the continual argument. 
Many Friends were misled by this. The cause of Chris- 
tianity is also good, but Friends would not, however, on 
that account, think it best to yield their support to a 
hireling ministry for its promotion, nor to justify every 
means which others might see cause to use for its exten- 
sion. They prefer to act in their own way. So do Friends 
here in regard to Slavery. While we are, and have long 
been convinced of its iniquity, and wish not to cease to 
proclaim its inconsistency with the Gospel, we desire 
that, in opposing it, Christian zeal may be tempered with 
Christian prudence and forbearance. We ought to wish 
to conciliate, and convince those who are in error, as did 
our early Friends on this subject. We do not wish to be 
excited to harsh or intemperate expressions. Our course 
should be marked by discretion, no less than by persever- 
ance. They seem to have different views and to be de- 
termined to carry them out, as reference to the Advices of 
our Yearly Meeting, and their opposition to them, and 
their after conduct, abundantly demonstrate. 

" You cannot reasonably suppose that so large a body 
of Friends as remain loyal to our good order, and united 
in the bonds of fellowship against the scattering and 
dividing spirit, are acting on party grounds ; especially 
when they are doing business, as in our religious meet- 
ings, under solemn responsibility to our heavenly Judge, 
and with desires to be rightly directed by Divine wisdom 
in the deep trials in which we are involed. Such a sup- 
position would do them injustice. Beside, you may be 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 215 

aware, that all the Yearly Meetings on this continent, 
entertain about the same views. (See their Epistles.) You 
say that ' most of the American Epistles advert to the state 
of Slavery in that country with feelings of abhorrence.' 
Of the sincerity of this we have no doubt, nor do we doubt 
that Indiana is properly included. You might also have 
said, that most, if not all, the Ministers and others, from 
other Yearly Meetings, including yours, who have been 
traveling in the service of Truth, and who have attended 
Indiana Yearly Meeting during the last three or four 
years, have united with Friends in the course taken, and 
given their support to the Advices so much spoken against 
by the seceders. 

" But while you refer to parties in this country, and 
say that you do not wish to be identified with either, you 
must not expect the old Yearly Meeting, as you call it, 
will go into controversy about the matter. And we pre- 
sume you will find yourselves under some necessity, if 
you devote your paper mainly to the interests of the So- 
ciety of Friends, to make a plain and unequivocal dis- 
tinction in your preferences. If you do not, the seceders 
will have accomplished, at least in part, what they have 
so ardently sought after — that is, to gain your appro- 
bation and support, and thus further to distract and 
divide society. Contention appears to be their element; 
disputation, discussion, and excitement, their great work. 
Hence, prudently desiring and preferring to cultivate the 
'unity of the spirit in the bond of peace,' Friends will not 
incline to enter into controversy. The very act would 
gratify what we believe is wrong in them, and essentially 
weaken us, though we might apparently have all the vic- 
tory of words on our side. 

"We hope you will bear kindly with the brotherly 
freedom in which we write, and in which we seem to cen- 
sure you. We have no doubt that ; Truth is mighty and 
will prevail, 5 and that time will make manifest, not only 
the weaknesses and errors of our seceding members, but 
ours also: and therefore we forbear to go into details, on 
many matters touching the Separation, that might, per- 



216 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

haps, be explained to present advantage. Nor can we 
have any just reason to doubt, that as Friends, and as 
individuals loving the good order and the discipline of 
the Society, you will see the propriety of standing up 
promptly in defense of those who remain loyal to it, and 
we hope that you may feel yourselves, in a good degree, 
at least, relieved from your apprehension concerning our 
favoritism to Slavery, on account of the representations 
of those who oppose, and who have left us. 

"We are grieved with the remark in the last paragraph 
of your editorial about the Separation, in which you say, 
you hope 'that the Yearly Meeting (of London) will be 
induced to disclaim any sympathy with the temporizing 
spirit so lamentably prevalent among many of our society 
in America, whereby the reputation of the body is endan- 
gered, and the way of Truth likely to be evil spoken of.' 
And further, that you ' trust the stain which attaches to 
the character of the Society of Friends in America, the 
unchristian prejudice against our fellow-man, 'guilty of 
a skin not colored like our own,' will shortly be removed, 
and Friends on that continent be found in their more 
appropriate vocation of undoing the heavy burdens, and 
letting the oppressed go free.' 

" By what authority can you say so ? While we do 
not boast of our works, nor of our freedom from weak- 
nesses and errors, and some defection in this as well as 
in other wrong things, we believe, with sorrow, that you 
have been misled by statements from prejudicial sources, 
derived, probably from our opposers, and not entitled to 
exactly that kind of confidence which you have placed in 
them. We think if you were among us your minds 
would be different. We beg you to remember, that in 
America, in the Society of Friends of all the Yearly 
Meetings, are to be found the long-tried friends of the 
slave, who have devoted themselves much during a large 
part of their lives, to the cause of humanity ; who have 
had, and still have, the unity and support of our society ; 
but who have not joined the Anti-Slavery societies, and 
who would be far from affording any strength to the 



1MDIANA YEARLY MEETING 0# FfclEftDS. 21f 

secession here ; and also, that the Society is engaged, we 
believe, in all the Yearly Meetings, by committees and 
otherwise, in doing good to this much injured class of 
our fellow-men ; and that applications are frequently 
made by the Society to legislative bodies, for the amelio- 
ration of their condition. 

" We are, respectfully, your friends, 

u Elijah Coffin, Benjamin Fulghum, 

John Pool, Barnabas C. Hobbs, 

¥m. Kenworthy." 



CHAPTER XIX. 

tleplj tG Elijah Coffin and others by the Editors of the British Friend* 

The Editors of the British Friend, with manly inde- 
pendence and Christian boldness, after giving publicity 
to the above (though, probably, it was not intended for 
the press by its authors), inserted, in their Journal, an 
excellent reply, which, I think, will be interesting to the 
reader. Here it is : 

4 s Indiana Yearly Meeting — the Seceders — and 
The Anti-Slavery Cause. — Our attention has again 
been called to this subject, by the receipt of a long letter, 
signed by five Friends belonging to Indiana Yearly 
Meeting, which will be found in preceding columns. Its 
object appears to be to disabuse the minds of Friends in 
this country, of the impressions they may have imbibed 
from perusing the statements of the seceders, which have 
appeared in our Journal, or by means of other publica- 
tions. These individuals do not inform us, whether 
they write by authority of the body of which they are 
members, or on their own responsibility; we incline, 
however, to the latter conclusion ; and shall now offer 



218 tUSTORf OF THE SEPARATION itt 

some remarks on their production, and on the question 
which it involves — the Anti-Slavery cause. 

" We are pleased with the good feeling in which the 
letter is written, though we are far from admiring those 
portions of it, in which they ascribe, as appears to us^ 
very unworthy motives to that portion of Friends who 
have felt it their duty, on Anti-Slavery principle, to sepa- 
rate from their brethren in religious profession. They 
express something like surprise, as well as sorrow, that 
so much matter has been published through our columns, 
regarding the secession ; anticipate what they term the 
injury which the circulation of it would inflict on the 
Yearly Meeting of which they are members ; and deem 
it their duty, though late, to endeavor to palliate such 
apprehended injury. We presume they have, ere now, 
seen from our subsequent numbers, that what we have 
published, has not been, as they suppose, altogether one- 
sided ; seeing we gave, in the British Friend for Seventh 
month, the Epistle of Indiana Meeting for Sufferings; 
and that, as our correspondents suggest, without note or 
comment, either on our own part or that of the seceders ; 
but ''fairly as an official document ' of Friends of In- 
diana. 

"Our correspondents state, that they 'have very little 
to do' with the 'Minutes' and 'Declaration' of the seced- 
ers. Now, we entirely differ from them herein. If they 
intended their letter effectually to counteract the state- 
ments of the seceding Friends, they ought to have gone 
into an open, manly, and straightforward exhibition of 
their own view of the question at issue. It will not do 
for a party coming after his neighbor to search him, to 
tell us that the 'Declaration' contains 'error, misrepre- 
sentation, and false coloring;' something very different 
from this must be adduced before the statements of the 
seceders can be satisfactorily met or confuted. And as 
regards what our correspondents call the 'evidently bad 
feeling' evinced by the seceders toward our religious 
society, not only in Indiana but America in general; we 
are well satisfied that the Declaration of the seceders will 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 219 

not suffer, in reference to the temper in which it is writ- 
ten, by comparison with the 'Review' of that document, 
noticed in our last, and to which they now refer us. 
Even the Epistle of the Meeting for Sufferings, already 
adverted to, does not, in our opinion, at all meet the 
case made out by the separatists, for the step they allege 
they were compelled to take. Indeed, the whole aim of 
the 'Review,' as well as the letter of our correspondents, 
is to throw blame upon those who have separated from 
the Indiana Yearly Meeting, on the ground not only of 
that meeting failing to evince, as they conceived, a sound 
and lively Anti-Slavery zeal, but because they were, as 
individuals, subjected to something like persecution on 
account of desiring to go beyond their brethren in this 
labor of love. 

"We have already had occasion to remark, in reference 
to the seceders, that we cannot think them in error simply 
because of their separating from the body and establish- 
ing another Yearly Meeting. They aver that they had 
abundant cause for so doing. It might have teen a wiser 
course could they have borne longer with those of diffe- 
rent views, and even to have endured greater suffering 
and loss of Christian privileges rather than separate; yet, 
aware there are among them those who have long been 
known as honest, upright, and faithful Friends, we have 
been, and still are, disposed to give them credit for sin- 
cerity in the step they took ; and we cannot but deprecate 
the assumption of our correspondents in arrogating to 
themselves and their party, that they exclusively ' wait to 
know and feel the sanctifying power and authority of the 
Holy Spirit,' in order to the right performance of their 
various duties as men and as Christians. So far as we 
have been able to observe, we feel bound to believe that 
the seceding Friends are equally sincere and upright, in 
intention, so long as they number among them such men 
as Charles Osborne, and others who might be named; 
men, who as assuredly believe as do our correspondents, 
that except as they act under the light and guidance of 
the Spirit of Truth, all their proceedings will be fruitless 



220 msToftY oir the separation m 

of good. Their having been necessitated, as they 
believe, to separate from their brethren cannot, of itself 
deprive them of the assistance and guidance of Him who 
is still ' nigh unto all them that call upon him ; unto all 
that call upon him in truth. 5 The seceders profess that 
they 'have not separated from the principles of the Soci- 
ety, nor from its testimonies and Discipline, but from 
that body of members who have departed from our testi- 
mony against Slavery, and from a due respect to the 
Discipline.' They further declare, that they 'wish it 
distinctly understood that they have adopted no new 
doctrine nor any new system of Church government / 
that they claim to be, in the strictest sense of the word, 
a society of Friends, with no other nominal distinction in 
the title which they have adopted, than that which is neces- 
sary to distinguish them from those whom they have left, 
and to express their adherence to our well-known testi- 
mony against Slavery. 5 Now, the assertion of our cor- 
respondents, that the separatists have departed ' from our 
well-known principles, 5 without adducing any proof, 
must go for nothing; and until we obtain some evidence 
that the seceders are not what they profess to be — - 
Friends — we must continue to esteem them as brethren 
in religious profession ; the more so, because they appre- 
hend themselves sufferers in the Anti-Slavery cause, yet 
desiring, in consistency and faithfulness, to support that 
humane and truly Christian object; and not only so, but 
we consider it to be the duty of the Meeting for Suffer- 
ings in London, the constituted representatives of the 
Society in this country, to enter into correspondence with 
the seceders, in accordance with the sympathy expressed 
at the Yearly Meeting, and in the hope that, through 
such intercourse, way may open for their being restored 
to unity with the Society. They appear to us to be even 
more entitled to the sympathy of Friends in this country 
than if they had never been connected with the body; 
and it would seem, from the opprobrium attempted to be 
cast upon them by those from whom they have esteemed 
it a duty to separate, that there is but little hope of their 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 221 

being 'the repairers of the breach;' it is far more pro- 
bable that parties may be reconciled and unity restored 
through the intervention of neutral persons. 

"Our Indiana correspondents inform us, that the 'De- 
claration 5 of the seceders, and ' the paper called the Free 
Labor Advocate, in which it was originally published, 
are considered by themselves and their party decidedly 
'pernicious J on account of their containing so much 
matter not only erroneous in itself, but which, if read and 
believed, would have a tendency to alienate Friends from 
one another and from the Church and the Truth, contrary 
to the Advices of their Yearly Meeting. 5 The meaning 
here is not very apparent. We have seen but few num- 
bers of the paper, but such as have come into our hands 
do not certainly, in our judgment, come up to the charac- 
ter here affixed to that Journal. We can conceive it 
possible that the Advocate, which appears to be con- 
ducted by Friends, in exposing what it has deemed the 
unsound sentiment and practice of the Society in relation 
to Slavery, may have entitled itself, in the estimation of 
our correspondents, as well as others, to the epithet 'per- 
nicious; 5 especially if the generality of its Anti-Slavery 
articles happen to be of the same complexion as one we 
lately quoted, entitled 'A new Idea among Friends 5 — 
wherein a prominent member of one of the Preparative 
meetings belonging to the old Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
is represented to have ' commented at some length on the 
conduct of the Abolitionists (he, of course, not being one 
of that class), and among other things, said they were 
guilty of conveying away fugitive slaves to a land of 
freedom — which was, in fact, stealing and secreting other 
men 5 s property P A representation like this, if founded 
on fact, cannot fail to have a ' pernicious 5 effect on the 
Anti-Slavery character of one and all who hold or indorse 
such sentiments; and so long as these views are cher- 
ished and propagated by persons calling themselves 
Friends, it is utterly vain to expect anything like either 
zealous or enlightened effort among Friends in America, 
in behalf of Abolition. 

10* 



222 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

" Our friends are very desirous to repudiate such repre- 
sentations of their Anti- Slavery feeling as the above, 
whether in the columns of newspapers, or in the ' Decla- 
ration' of the 'Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends;' 
and tell us, that Friends in Indiana i entertain a warm 
and decisive Anti-Slavery feeling' — that 'they have 
shown it in various acts' — that ' they are continually 
exercising it, and as Truth may open the way, will, they 
hope, be faithful still to continue to make it appear. 
And,' they add, 'there is reason to believe, that their 
way will be much cleared by the absence of the seceders. 
Referring to the Epistle of their Meeting for Sufferings, 
our correspondents inform us that 'various charges, con- 
tained in the Declaration and other publications of the 
seceders, such as that our (the Indiana) Yearly Meeting 
is opposing the abolition of Slavery ; countenancing 
and supporting slave-holding and Slavery, etc., are pro- 
nounced to be false and unfounded.' It is next stated, 
that ' the seceders have been very anxious, both before 
and since the separation, to get themselves identified 
with Friends in England and Ireland !' That they have 
spared no efforts 'by writing letters, sending papers, 
documents, etc., to prejudice Friends abroad, and to 
enlist their sympathies in their favor. They warn you 
against being imposed upon by our representations, when 
we were making none (a guilty conscience is its own 
accuser'). Now really, we must remark, in this place, 
that the memories of our correspondents are here com- 
pletely at fault. Had they forgotten the Epistle of their 
Meeting for Sufferings, dated the 6th and 7th of Third 
month, 1843? (See our 7th No., page 109, Vol. 1,) in 
which the seceding Friends are stated to have been actu- 
ated by ' the workings of a spirit of activity, self-confi- 
dence, and insubordination V Was not such a statement 
as this a representation ? not to mention other charges in 
the same Epistle; which, we believe, had arrived in this 
country before a single line had reached us, regarding 
the secession, from any quarter. Had not, therefore, a 
complete obliviousness on this matter come over our 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 223 

friends, they never would have permitted such a quota- 
tion as that about ' a guilty conscience* to have found a 
place in their letter. 

" Our correspondents further inform us, that the 
4 seceding' Friends 'arrogate to themselves and their 
associates the credit of being the only ones in the country 
engaged in the Anti- Slavery cause.' This we regard as 
a decidedly overcharged picture of the seceders' senti- 
ments; and we have never seen anything, that we 
remember, to warrant such a representation of the 
'Yearly Meeting of Anti- Slavery Friends? Again, it 
is said of the seceders, • They puff small matters into 
great consequence (such as Henry Clay's going to 
Friends' meeting one First-day, as he passed through this 
place),' etc. And ' even the sympathy expressed in the 
editorial of the British Friend has,' it seems, ; been 
referred to, magnified, and circulated with exultation — 
and pardon us (our friends continue), if we take this 
opportunity to say in freedom, that circumstanced as you 
were, with none but their representations before you, we 
believe you went too far in your sympathy.' Again, it is 
said that in our editorial w r e ' seem to admit that the only 
cause of separation was Pro-Slavery, on one part, and 
Anti-Slavery, on the other.' 

" In several of the foregoing quotations there is a wide 
scope for remark ; but we must be brief. With regard 
to the justice of the statement made by the seceders, that 
the Indiana Yearly Meeting was ' opposing the abolition 
of Slavery and countenancing slaveholders,' etc. ; it 
would have been well had our correspondents — instead 
of referring us to the Epistle of their Meeting for Suffer- 
ings, where the allegation is pronounced to be ' false and 
unfounded' — given us some more satisfactory evidence on 
the subject. They do not deny the fact,, that Henry Clay was 
countenanced and that in the most marked manner. 
Like their friend, the writer of the ; Review' of the seced- 
ers' ■ Declaration,' they do not say that was ' false;' they 
only join in the attempt to palliate the affair. Now, we 
do not hesitate to declare that such attention, paid to a 



224 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

slaveholder, was but a very questionable proof, to say the 
least, of the sound Anti-Slavery feeling of Friends of 
Indiana. The seceders, we are told, 'puf small mat- 
ters? What? call it a small matter thus to notice so 
notorious a dealer in the bones and blood, and sinews of 
his fellow-man — he who, but the day before, talked with 
such remarkable coolness (to some of these same Friends, 
it may be) of his owning about fifty slaves, and that ' he 
considered them his property , n 

" Unchristian thought ! on what pretense soe'er 
Of right, inherited, or else acquired; 
Of loss, of profit, or what plea you name ! 
To buy and sell, to barter, whip, and hold 
In chains, a being of celestial make; 
Of kindred form, of kindred faculties; 
Of kindred feelings, passions, thoughts, desires; 
Born free and heir of an immortal hope ! 
Thought * * * only overreached in wickedness 
By that, which aini'd to make a reasonable man 
By legislation think; and by the sword believe" 

" Instead of Henry Clay being taken to meeting by a 
Friend in his gig, and thus, in Ms person, practically 
countenancing slave-holding and Slavery, such a thing 
would have been spurned by a genuine Abolitionist ; and 
the slaveholder, on the contrary, would have had the 
kindness done him of exhorting him to ' loose the bands 
of wickedness ; to undo the heavy burdens ; to let the 
oppressed go free, and to break every yoke. 5 Such faith- 
fulness as this, it is true, would not be likely to ** retain? 
for individuals or for Friends, in America generally — we 
quote their own words — the place and influence which, 
as a society, they have heretofore had with the rulers of 
the landP' — Indiana Epistle of Advice, 1841. Away 
with such place and influence, we say, if it is to be 
enjoyed on condition of openly countenancing slavehold- 
ers, instead of proclaiming, as upon ' the house-top,' that 
Slavery is a sin in the sight of the Almighty, and ought 
immediately to be abolished ! Are we told that our cir- 
cumstances in this country, as regards Slavery, were very 
different from those of our brethren in America ? We 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 225 

are aware of it. Is it urged that the General Government 
possesses no power to legislate for the different States in 
reference to Abolition ? Of that, too, we are cognizant. 
It has, however, absolute power over the District of 
Columbia, to proclaim freedom as by the dash of a pen. 
To this point Friends, in conjunction with other Aboli- 
tionists, may unceasingly direct their pleadings till the 
desired objects are obtained. And however different the 
circumstances of the two countries, we can see nothing 
which obstructs the march of emancipation, which an 
honest zeal, on the part of Friends, guided by Christian 
principle, would not, under the Divine blessing, be able 
to overcome ; and ' liberty be proclaimed throughout all 
the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.' 

" Our correspondents evince some little adroitness, in 
making us use words not to be found in our pages on 
this subject. We allude to the expression said to have 
appeared in our 5th Number — f Pro-Slavery on one part, 
and Anti- Slavery on the other.' Now, we never used 
these expressions. What we stated was, c That the Sep- 
aration had respect solely to the abolition of Slavery.' 
And, in our preceding Number, we remarked : ' It is 
comforting to know, that the separation has not been oc- 
casioned by difference on points of doctrine ; but simply 
with reference to the course of Christian duty, in regard 
to' Abolition. We meant our words to convey no inju- 
rious or offensive meaning ; but that Friends of the new 
Yearly Meeting deemed it incumbent on them to take a 
more decided and active part in the Anti-Slavery enter- 
prise in the United States; while those of the original 
Yearly Meeting seemed disposed to continue their course, 
of keeping aloof from that movement. 

"The statement in the letter to J. C. Fuller, in refer- 
ence to the ' well-known fact, that the influence of the 
Society of Friends in America, is almost universally un- 
derstood to be hostile to the Anti-Slavery enterprise,' 
will, it is said, be looked upon by Friends there with ab- 
horrence. For this we see no remedy, except by an 
altered course upon the part of Friends. Their opposi- 



226 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

tion to the Anti-Slavery societies is no new thing to us ; 
we have seen it alluded to in American papers, several 
years ago, before there was anything like separation in 
Indiana contemplated ; and it is the firm belief of some 
of the most eminent Abolitionists in the two countries, 
both among the members of our society and others. It 
is an opposition greatly to be lamented ; but not to men- 
tion other matters, if Friends in America continue to vote 
for such men as John Tyler, the slaveholder^ be Pres- 
ident, and that almost in ; one unbroken phalanx' — they 
must be content with the character assigned them, how- 
ever repugnant they may feel it — for surely their conduct 
in this instance harmonizes somewhat lamely with their 
saying, that 6 they entertain a warm and decisive Anti- 
Slavery feeling, 5 which ' they are continually exercising, 5 
and waiting for way to open that they c may still contine 
to make it appear!' 

" Our correspondents query, c on what authority' we 
have spoken as we have done, in this controversy ? We 
may briefly reply, we have had no guide but the profes- 
sions and actions of the respective parties, both of them 
being entire strangers to us, Charles Osborne excepted. 
We can have no party feeling, therefore, in the matter ; 
neither do we wish to be regarded as the organ of any 
party. A concern that our Society in that land should 
maintain a reputation consistent with its well-known pro- 
fessions, in regard to Slavery, alone dictated what we 
have written; and we may confess, that we should have 
been most happy could we have formed, or had now 
ground for forming, a different conclusion. 

" One remark more, and we conclude. As to the num- 
ber in ; all the Yearly Meetings who are the long- 
tried friends of the Slave,' we can only wish it were much 
greater than it is — but the conduct of these or even of 
ministering Friends from this country, in this respect, or 
in not affording any strength to the secession, is nothing 
decisive to us of the question at issue ; so long as the 
statements of the seceders remain unrefuted. 

" To evade controversy, lest we should gratify what is 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 227 

wrong in others, as is pleaded by our correspondents, in 
excuse for their not proving themselves in the right, 
seems little to betoken confidence in their being so ; and 
is a course neither respectful, nor commendable for its 
justice to themselves — to their opponents — nor to those 
whose favorable judgment is solicited in the dispute. 

" We have been as desirous as our correspondents to 
write ; in brotherly freedom, 5 which we trust will not be 
worse received than theirs has been. ; As Friends, and 
as individuals loving the good order of the Society, 5 we 
would wish, according to our feeble measure, to stand up 
in defense of such as remain loyal to it, provided they 
are so in consistency with the spirit, and not the letter 
merely, of our profession. Our Discipline is good in it- 
self, but it may be an instrument of oppression in im- 
proper hands. Trusting we have now defined, with suf- 
ficient explicitness, how far our sympathy is to be enlisted 
on either side, we must, for the present, leave the 
subject. 55 



CHAPTER XX. 

Remarks by the Editor of the Free Labor Advocate on the Correspond- 
ence between E. Coffin and others and the Editors of the British 
Friend. — A Review by Daniel Puckett and others of certain Positions 
and Proceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, etc. 

The editor of the Free Labor Advocate, after copying 
the two foregoing documents into that paper, from the 
British Friend, published some very appropriate remarks 
relative to the correspondence, from which I take the 
following : 



"IMPORTANT CORRESPONDENCE. 

" Surely the writers of the letter can no longer attribute 
the views of the editors to a lack of information, after 



228 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

the long and elaborate communication sent for the express 
purpose of giving them a correct view on the subject, 
written by those the most capable of doing it justice (or 
injustice), of any within the pale of their Yearly Meeting. 
It is to be hoped that the caustic and well-merited re- 
bukes of our transatlantic Friends, will teach the letter 
writers that wise, impartial men will discern the differ- 
ence between reason and railing — between empty decla- 
mation and a plain and sober statement of facts, accom- 
panied by documentary and other substantial evidence of 
their truth. 

" The letter has been so thoroughly used up by our 
British Friends, that there is but little left, requiring any 
additional remarks. There are, however, a few passages 
which it may be well briefly to notice. 

" The letter writers say, ' Among the many mistakes 
contained in the Declaration, no one would seem wider 
of the mark, than the conclusion which is come to after 
much laborious argument, that Friends in this country 
are favorable to Slavery.' If they mean to say that our 
Declaration asserts that Friends in this country are sen- 
timentally in favor of Slavery, as their language fairly 
implies, all the reply that seems necessary, is, that there 
is no such assertion in our Declaration, or any other doc- 
ument of ours. But if they mean, that the Declaration, 
conveys the idea that their action against A. S. Friends, 
and the Abolitionists in general, is favorable to the con- 
tinuance of Slavery ; then, if there is no greater mistake 
than this in the Declaration, it must be a very faultless 
document — without mistake from beginning to end. The 
public has already had too much evidence on this point 
to need more. 

" Further on in their letter they use the following lan- 
guage : ; Such sentiments as the following in the letter 
to J. C. Fuller, now before us in your paper, will be 
looked upon with abhorrence by Friends here. It is a 
well-known fact, that the influence of the Society of 
Friends, in this country, is almost universally under- 
stood to he opposed, to the Anti-Slavery enterprise? 



INDIANA YEARL* MEETING OF FRIENDS. 229 

They then query, ; By whom is it so universally under- 
stood V and answer the question by saying, ' By none, 
we believe, except the seceders, and those in their favor 
and under their influence, and those who have borrowed 
their ideas from them in their papers. 5 Now this is all 
extraordinary, and it is difficult to believe that they would 
have hazarded such expressions, if they had supposed 
they would ever have been made public in this country, 
where the facts are well known. It is very clear, that in 
the use of the term ' Anti-Slavery enterprise,' in the let- 
ter to J. 0. Fuller, we intended to designate the efforts 
now being made by those called ' modern Abolitionists,' or 
the doctrine of immediate and unconditional emancipa- 
tion, as taught and advocated by the modern A. S. soci- 
eties. Now, will our letter writers have the presumption 
to deny that the influence of the Society of Friends, in 
this country, is almost universally understood to be op- 
posed to this enterprise ? Dare they do it, in the face of 
all the evidence of its truth before the public? Dare 
they do it, when it is well known that Abolitionists so 
regard it \ — that the most violent and determined oppo- 
sers of the enterprise have again and again eulogized the 
Friends, as taking the right ground on this question ? — 
when slaveholders themselves, with H. Clay at their 
head, known to be actuated by an implacable hatred to 
the enterprise, have frequently claimed the Society of 
Friends as being the right kind of Abolitionists \ — when 
they themselves have given the most indisputable evi- 
dence of the truth of the assertion, by taking special pains 
to inform legislative bodies, slaveholders and the public 
generally, that they have no connection, in any way, 
with ' modern Abolitionists ; 3 by proscribing their mem- 
bers for uniting with others, or for forming associations 
among themselves for the promotion of this enterprise ; 
by shutting their meeting-houses against the advocates of 
the cause ; by frequently reiterating the absurd charge 
made by H. Clay, that the Abolitionists had put back the 
cause of emancipation, and by the well-known partiality 
of many of them for the Colonization scheme? The 

11 



230 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

signers of the letter under consideration can not, without 
the most barefaced disregard to truth, deny that their in- 
fluence is opposed to the A. Slavery enterprise, in the 
sense in which the term is used in the letter to J. C. 
Fuller. 

u I shall dismiss this subject, at this time, by stating 
that the letter, and the animadversions thereon, are given 
as they are found in the British Friend, italicizing and 
all. Let both the documents have an attentive perusal, 
and an impartial examination, by every one who would 
arrive at truth. I have no desire to restrict the reader to 
one side of the question, like the letter writers, in recom- 
mending to the editors of the British Friend to publish 
the statement of their Meeting for Sufferings, 4 clear of 
any remarks, notes or comments of the seceders.' Here 
is a remarkable evidence of a lack of confidence in the 
justice of their cause, as well as unfairness of intention. 
Truth shuns not investigation ; but error, conscious of its 
deformity, dreads the scrutinizing torch of critical exam- 
ination." 

"The following document, published in the 'Free 
Labor Advocate,' in Twelfth month, of this year, 1843, 
was written by an individual, as a review of certain po- 
sitions and statements of Indiana Yearly Meeting and 
some of its active members, and as a further exhibition 
of facts, particularly relative to the treatment of Charles 
Osborne. But its publication was deferred until it was 
thoroughly examined in presence of Charles and a num- 
ber of other Friends. The editor of that paper, in his 
introduction to the article, observes that ' the principal 
inducement to its publication, is to do an act of simple 
justice to that devoted servant of the Lord, Charles 
Osborne, who has been treated in a most cruel manner by 
those who should have been his most unflinching friends. I 
am fully prepared to say, that much of what is related, 
took place under my own observation, and the balance I 
have from such authority, that I fully believe the state- 
ments are substantially correct. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 231 

" Dear Friend, B. Stanton : — 

" Notwithstanding our Yearly Meeting and Meeting 
for Sufferings of Anti-Slavery Friends have shown to a 
considerable extent, the Pro-Slavery character of the pro- 
ceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends, and its ar- 
bitrary, prescriptive, and unchristian measures toward 
those of its members who have been actively engaged in the 
present Anti-Slavery enterprise, yet it appears to me, that 
the cause of truth and justice demands some further de- 
velopment of facts 5 and some additional examination of 
different points already taken into consideration. 

" In the Address from the Meeting for Sufferings of 
that Yearly Meeting, issued in Third month last, we find 
a virtual claim to perfection, in regard to Anti-Slavery 
principles and practices. Now, if this claim be valid— 
if it be true, as they declare in this Address, that it is 
an ' untrue and unfounded charge,' to say, that * Indiana 
Yearly Meeting by its measures, is countenancing and 
supporting slaveholders, slave-holding, and Slavery, or 
that apathy and the fear of popular sentiment, have been 
suffered to get possession,' then it must be evident that 
the reverse of these is true, and consequently that they 
are doing all that can reasonably be asked for in the 
promotion of the abolition of Slavery. But let us examine 
this matter for a few moments. 

u Was it giving Henry Clay, the great slaveholder and 
Pro-Slavery politician, no countenance for the Clerk of 
the Yearly Meeting to take him in his carriage to the 
meeting-house, to lead him about by the arm, and for 
Friends to introduce him into one of the most conspicu- 
ous seats in the meeting-house — to gather round him in 
crowds, with manifest eagerness to shake his hand, and 
be introduced to his notice? Did he not give public 
demonstrations, that he regarded the principles of the 
Society as coinciding with his own, when he declared 
that ' they take the right ground in relation to this sub- 
ject ; that the slaves must be prepared for freedom, before 
they can receive that great boon V Where can we find 
anything of recent date — among all the productions of 



232 HISTORY OF THE SEPAftATlOtf t« 

slaveholders or Pro-Slavery presses, either North ot 
South — a word spoken against the Society of Friends, 
especially of Indiana, on account of its opposition to 
Slavery ? Nay, on the other hand, do we not find lauda- 
tory notices of its actions in regard to the Abolitionists 
in these Pro-Slavery vehicles? 

" If Indiana Yearly Meeting is at the present time in 
favor of immediate and unconditional emancipation, as 
insisted upon by individuals, and if its testimony against 
Slavery has recently been growing stronger, and the 
members of that body have no fear of popular sentiment, 
as they virtually declare, why have they not corrected 
Henry Clay's public statement in regard to their prin- 
ciples? This declaration, coming as it did, from such a 
noble character, has been circulated far and wide over 
the United States, and not a word is heard from that 
Yearly Meeting or its representatives, disclaiming the 
sentiments attributed to them. Why this death-like 
silence on a question of so much importance to the pre- 
sent and eternal welfare of millions of our fellow-beings, 
as that of saying whether they should now be set free 
from the galling chains of Slavery, or should remain 
bound for an indefinite period, to become prepared for free* 
dom, under the absolute control of tyrant masters? One 
of three things at least, must be true. They are either 
not in favor of immediate emancipation, or else apathy 
or the fear of popular sentiment has been suffered to get 
possession ; their assertion to the contrary notwithstand- 
ing. 

" That a 'tear of popular sentiment' prevails, we 
have only to refer to the Minutes of Advice of 1841, 
where they express such a warm desire to c retain a place 
and influence with the rulers of the land.' 

" These rulers being elected according to the will and 
sentiment of the people, may very properly be regarded as 
the very essence of public sentiment, and it was for fear 
of losing place, influence, etc., by a contrary course, that 
Friends were advised not to unite with the Abolitionists* 
What else could have induced them to make the expres- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 233 

sion ? If the rulers of our land had been Anti-Slavery, 
and such as had been chosen by Abolitionists, there would 
have been no danger of losing ' place and influence ' 
with them, by uniting with their constituents in the pro- 
motion of a common cause. This is certainly a plain 
case. It was because popular sentiment was against the 
Abolitionists, that Friends were advised not to associate 
with them. And indeed, individuals of high standing 
have not hesitated to avow it in direct terms. Whether 
in all this, there is no manifestation of a fear of popular 
sentiment, let others judge. And if they are in favor of 
immediate emancipation, how can it be possible they 
entertain the proper zeal and concern for the promotion 
of this cause (which, to deny, they say is an unfounded 
charge), and at the same time neglect to correct the pub- 
lic misrepresentations of Henry Clay, in regard to 
their principles? 

" Inasmuch as great pains have been taken by the 
ruling party in the Yearly Meeting, to prostrate the 
character and influence of Charles Osborne, a minister 
who has long been extensively known in the Society, not 
only in the United States, but also in Europe, it appears 
to me but an act of justice, that the position he has occu- 
pied before them, in relation to the Anti-Slavery cause, 
and some, at least, of the treatment he has met with at 
their hands, should be more generally made known, 
while at the same time, a desire not to wound unneces- 
sarily the feelings of individuals of our opposing Friends, 
who have thus acted, dictates the withholding of their 
names from the public. 

" In the Meeting for Sufferings at the time of Yearly 
Meeting in 1841, when that Epistle was about to be 
issued, advising Friends not to open their meeting- 
houses to Anti-Slavery societies, Charles Osborne, after 
having opposed its being issued, without effect, being 
aware that such a course would identify the Society with 
the opposers of the Anti-Slavery cause, at least without 
a clear and decided declaration in favor of the principles 
held by the Abolitionists, and apprehending that if such 



234: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

must be the course of the meeting, it presented an im- 
perious call so to do, requested that the meeting issue a 
declaration to the world, stating what plan of emancipa- 
tion it was in favor of, as it was well known there was a 
diversity of sentiment in the Society ; some were in favor of 
Colonization , some gradual emancipation , while others were 
in favor of immediate and unconditional freedom. But the 
meeting refused to say anything whatever on the subject. 

"Here again, let us call to mind the assumption, that 
apathy does not prevail — that their testimony has been 
growing stronger, etc. ; and at the same time reflect that 
many members, some in high standing, have contended, 
at least in Quarterly and Monthly Meetings, as the query 
asks : ' are Friends careful to bear a testimony against 
Slavery V that, therefore, the framers of it did not mean 
a faithful one ; and in more private circles they have 
advanced the idea, that the query was formed in wisdom, 
because of the difficulty there is to encounter in main- 
taining such a testimony, and hence, that we were very 
properly required only to bear a testimony. Some of 
this class have taken the position, that it is evidence of 
our maintaining such a testimony as the Discipline con- 
templates if we do not hold slaves, or speak in favor of it ; 
and yet, after all this, we are gravely told, that it is an 
unfounded charge, to impute apathy to them in regard to 
the subject. 

"In relation to the measures put in operation toward 
Anti-Slavery Friends, they say, ' we have felt ourselves 
religiously concerned to proceed to do such duties as 
were required at our hands, in mildness, tenderness, and 
under the influence of Heavenly love and forbearance. 5 
The exhibition of a few facts, will furnish data more 
fully perhaps than has yet been done, from which this 
assumption may be properly estimated. 

" At the Meeting for Sufferings, at the time of Yearly 
Meeting last year, when Charles Osborne and others were 
reported as disqualified members of that body, he rose 
and observed in the meeting, ' it will perhaps be ex- 
pected that I should say something in regard to this 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 235 

matter. I have done what I have done in the Anti- 
Slavery cause, in the integrity of my heart, as unto God, 
believing it better to trust in Him than in any man or 
set of men, and He knows my heart, and He knows that 
my prayers are for you, and for all men, and unto Him I 
commit my cause.' But pathetic as these remarks were, 
they availed nothing; the business progressed on, and 
they were shortly after reported to the Yearly Meeting as 
disqualified members, at which time he again remarked, 
£ I have but one request to make of the meeting. I am 
here reported, and several of my brethren with me, as 
disqualified members of the Meeting for Sufferings. My 
request is, that the cause of disqualification may be put 
upon Minute, that wherever it may come, there the cause 
may also appear. It is our due, justice demands it, the 
cause of truth and righteousness demands it, and the 
cause of suffering, bleeding humanity demands it. I 
have no wish to cast reflections on any body, but in my 
opinion, the proceedings are unjust, oppressive, cruel, 
and unauthorized by Discipline. 5 

u But the party which instituted these measures stead- 
ily prosecuted them, notwithstanding many Friends ear- 
nestly remonstrated against it. And here, it should be 
remembered, that neither he nor any of the others, thus 
publicly exposed, was ever informed that their names 
would be reported, previous to their being read in the 
meeting. Thus even the opportunity of requesting to be 
released from being members of that body, rather than 
be held up as objects of public censure, was denied them. 

" Are these indeed, the fruits of Heavenly love and 
forbearance ? 

u Some time in 1810, a company of Friends visited 
Charles Osborne, as he states, evidently in consequence of 
the circulation of a report, that he had led an Anti- 
Slavery lecturer into the gallery, and had taken him to 
his house, entertained him, etc. When they were in- 
formed that the report in regard to leading into the gal- 
lery, was not correct, they seemed to be much pleased to 
find he had not done 8 this great thing,' 



236 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

"Now let us call to mind the conducting of Henry 
Clay to one of the most conspicuous seats in the Yearly 
Meeting-house by this same class of Friends, and the 
leading of him about by the arm, by the Clerk, who was 
one of those who revolt at the idea of such treatment to- 
ward an Abolitionist. What are we to understand by 
this contrast in regard to what they deem proper treatment 
toward these individuals ? Remember, apathy or a fear 
of popular sentiment, and consequently a love of popular 
applause does not prevail ! 

" The company above referred to, at the same time 
also interrogated him respecting his views, about form- 
ing Friends' A. S. societies. He informed them that 
no such societies had yet been formed, and gave them 
some of his views, stating his conviction of the necessity 
of Friends being actively engaged in circulating suit- 
able publications on the subject, which was one particu- 
lar object proposed to be effected by such societies. But 
they all appeared to be utterly opposed to the formation 
of such institutions, insomuch that some of them asked 
him to promise to put a stop to the business. He 
promptly replied, that it was in vain to ask him to pro- 
mise to do any such thing. 

" A short time previous to the last Yearly Meeting at 
Richmond, four individuals, among whom was a minis- 
ter from another Yearly Meeting, in an interview with 
him, observed to him, that although he had been highly 
approved, he was now fallen and out of the life, and that 
if he removed to Michigan (which was his prospect), he 
was gone forever, and that there was no chance for him 
but to stay where he was, in the bosom of Society, and 
make an acknowledgment that would satisfy his friends. 
Just before the close of the Yearly Meeting last year, 
Charles bore a short, though powerful testimony, and 
one very appropriate to the occasion, and suitable to the 
circumstances in which the Society was involved. After 
which, when the meeting had closed, he was taken aside, 
and some of the Elders of the ruling party gathered 
around him, and as he informs us, told him positively, 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 237 

that the communication above referred to c was out of the 
life. 5 

" In the course of the interview, although they said in 
substance they had known his principles for twenty 
years, and that they were the same now, yet they urged 
him to come back to them, and be as he had been. He 
tht j n referred to what had previously been enjoined upon 
him, viz : that he must make an acknowledgment, etc. 

" He was then told that if he would only go with 
them, they would take him without any acknowledgment; 
and one of them said he would willingly go with him as 
a companion, into Kentucky, on a religious visit; I sup- 
pose, to plead the cause of freedom, 6 where the evil of 
Slavery exists,' instead of doing it here, where 4 we have 
nothing to do with it. 5 

" Here, let us reflect for a moment. It is said by 
Ministers and Elders, virtually claiming by charging 
others with working in their own will and strength, to be 
acting in complete accordance with the Divine mind, 
that there is no chance for him, but to make an acknow- 
ledgment, and condemn his conduct to the satisfaction of 
his Friends. 

" Again, the same class, making the same exalted pro- 
fession, after demanding of him a condemnation of his 
conduct as required by Divine authority (because remem- 
ber, they assume all the while to be laboring in the Lord's 
will and time), tell him in substance, he shall not ' be 
gone forever,' if he does not make an acknowledgment, 
if he will only go with them ! But how go with them ? 
Why, notwithstanding such a course would be contrary 
to the advice contained in the proceedings of a former 
Yearly Meeting, which in their late Address, they claim 
as their own, just be careful to cast discouragements in 
the way of those who are faithfully laboring to promote 
universal emancipation, whether such laborers be found 
within or without the pale of Societ} r . Just throw his 
whole influence against the Abolitionists, and unite with 
their opposers in closing meeting-houses against them, 
and in denouncing them before the world. This is all 



238 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

they could ask, for he had not joined any Anti-Slavery 
society contrary to their advice. True, he was an efficient 
member of one in Tennessee, more than twenty-five years 
ago, but then it was not contrary to the advice of any 
Yearly Meeting in the world. Of what here, have we 
an undoubted evidence ? Does truth ever contradict it- 
self? is the Divine will subject to such 'variableness, 
such shiftings ' and turnings ? Oh ! how has the gold 
become dim, and the most fine gold changed! as said the 
prophet to Jerusalem, formerly once the highly -favored 
city ; and so may it now appropriately be said of Indi- 
ana Yearly Meeting. ' Thy silver has become dross, thy 
wine mixed with water, thy princes are rebellious, and 
companions of thieves ; every one loveth gifts, and fol- 
io weth after rewards ; they judge not the fatherless, 
neither doth the cause of the widow come unto them.' 

" If the cause of truth and righteousness and the 
course he had pursued, demanded of him a condemna- 
tion of his conduct before the brethren, how could they, 
for the sake of retaining one among them who was 
' gone, fallen, and out of the life,' receive him without? 
If such was not the case, upon what principle did they 
demand the acknowledgment? Who cannot discover in 
all this a lamentable lack of moral integrity, a succumb- 
ing to that low principle of expediency and worldly po- 
licy, which is far beneath the dignified character of a true 
Christian or christian Church. 

64 It is well known that the sentiments of Charles 
Osborne in relation to this subject, are the same now, they 
were more than twenty-five years ago ; and I am confident 
no person w 7 ho was then, and is now acquainted with them, 
will deny it. In that length of time, he has traveled 
very extensively as a Minister of the Society, and with 
the approbation thereof, perhaps as fully as any person 
ever has. Thus we see, that he was recently censured, 
proscribed, and put down, for doing those very things, 
and entertaining those identical sentiments which he did 
previously, with the entire unity and concurrence of the 
Society, 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 239 

" The above circumstances and various others of a 
similar character can be attested if called for, by numer- 
ous substantial witnesses. 

" To the preceding document, the following note was 
appended. 

" From our own personal knowledge, and from the 
statements of Charles Osborne himself, we the under- 
signed, have no hesitation in saying, that the foregoing 
statements are substantially correct. 

" Daniel Puckett, Jacob Grave, 

Walter Edgerton, John Shugart, 

H. H. Way, Levi Coffin." 



GHAPTEE XXI. 

Exposition of the Sentiments and Principles of leading Members of In- 
diana Yearly Meeting relative to Slavery. 

• The following extract from the editorial columns of the 
'Free Labor Advocate,' of Eleventh month, 1843, may 
not be uninteresting to the reader as furnishing additional 
evidence of the real position of the parties. 

" Just before the organization of our Yearly Meeting 
of Anti-Slavery Friends, Wm. Hobbs, on behalf and in 
the name of the Yearly Meetings Committee, appointed 
to visit the Subordinate meetings for the purpose of car- 
rying into effect the arbitrary measures of the ruling 
party, made request, in the Preparative meeting at New- 
port, that if we, Anti-Slavery Friends, knew of any ac- 
tive Friends of fair standing, who held unsound views in 
reference to the subject of Slavery, such as we had some- 
times attributed to them, and in a particular manner, if 
we knew of any such who were opposed to aiding and 
assisting fugitive slaves on their way to Canada, we 



240 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

should furnish them, the said committee, with a state- 
ment of the case or cases, in order, as was pretended, 
that they might deal with them for their delinquency. 
This was the ostensible object of the request: but the 
sequel will testify whether the real object was not to in- 
volve us in difficulty. But Hainan was hanged on his 
own gallows. On the morning of their called Meeting 
for Sufferings on the Third month last, a paper, of which 
the following is a copy, was put into the hands of Wm. 
Hobbs, and he requested to attend to it as there would be 
a fair opportunity during the meeting. He was informed 
that we should take no further notice of the matter until 
we should see that justice was not likely to be done. 
And now, after the lapse of more than half a year, and 
nothing been done to satisfy justice, I feel under an obli- 
gation to lay the matter before the public. 

" Joel Dixon said, he did not like such secret busi- 
ness as hiding or assisting runaway slaves. 

"George Carter said, he would not actively assist a 
fugitive slave in making his escape, even if he knew his 
master was in close pursuit. 

" Aaron White recently said, that he believed that 
slaves, in their present condition, are not prepared for 
freedom ; that if they get a little liberty they want all. 
He said he believed in emancipation, but he thought it 
right to be effected gradually. 

" Jeremiah Hubbard has said, that he believed the 
Anti-Slavery Society ought to, and would go down, and 
Colonization succeed ; he continues to speak against the 
Anti-Slavery enterprise, and has repeatedly, within the 
last two years, circulated his appeal to the citizens of the 
United States and Great Britain, in behalf of the Colon- 
ization Society. 

" Thomas Arnett, in a committee of the Meeting for 
Sufferings, positively condemned the practice of assisting 
fugitive slaves in making their escape to a land of free- 
dom, as being very wrong and inconsistent. 

u Thomas Wells, when on a religious visit to the 
meetings constituting Alum Creek Quarterly meeting, 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING 0# FRIENDS. 24i 

some time ago, made a practice of censuring for assisting 
fugitive slaves, and in some places said it would be bet- 
ter to advise them to return to their masters. For the 
truth of this statement, refer to Thomas Cowgill and 
William Pearson, of Gohen Monthly meeting, and to 
John Lewis and wife, of Alum Creek Monthly meeting. 

" But a few years ago (and we know not but it is the 
case yet), many leading Friends of Miami Quarterly 
meeting, and particularly of Caesar's Creek Monthly 
meeting, decidedly and earnestly opposed the practice of 
actively aiding fugitive slaves, many times characterizing 
it as theft ; among whom are Robert Furnas, John Spray, 
Jesse Spray, etc., etc., etc. 

" The above statements are made in compliance with 
a request of the Yearly Meetings Committee through 
William Hobbs, that we should furnish them with facts 
in relation to these matters, and not out of any resent- 
ment or ill-will to the persons named. Some of them 
are particular friends of some of us, and we continue to 
cherish for them feelings of high regard. 

"If any of the abore charges should be denied, we 
will furnish good authority. Let it be understood that 
we have not pretended to give the language of the per- 
sons named verhatim, but we think we have given the 
substance correctly.' 5 

" P. S. If time and space would admit of it, and if 
we thought necessary, numerous instances might be given 
of Friends more or less active in Society, holding senti- 
ments similar to the above, and even more glaringly 
inconsistent; but our only aim is to comply with the 
request of the committee, by furnishing statements re- 
specting a few of the most prominent and influential 
m embers. '" 



242 HISTORY Of THE SEPARATION IN 



CHAPTEE XXII. 

"An Expostulation to those who have lately seceded from the Society of 

Friends." 

About the time of the publication of the above, an* 
other document made its appearance in public, in the 
form of a tract, entitled, u An Expostulation to those who 
have lately seceded from the Society of Friends." 

To this the author ventured to place his name. I will 
here insert it. 



AN EXPOSTULATION 

TO THOSE WHO HAVE LATELY SECEDED PROM THE 
RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS. 

" Dear Friends: — 

u Although you have frequently published to the 
world the causes that you say have led to your secession, 
it remains a subject of surprise to me why men, hereto- 
fore believed to be of sound and discerning minds, should 
have separated from, perhaps, the only religious society 
in America, that denies church-membership to slave- 
holders, let them reside where they may, because it was 
not opposed to Slavery. Neither is the Society silent in 
bearing its testimony against the evils of Slavery, but is 
on the contrary, both by its Discipline and Advices, fre- 
quently calling the attention of its members to the sub- 
ject. Now let us seriously examine your alleged causes, 
and see of what they do really consist. 

" You say you seceded because the Yearly Meeting 
advised its members against joining in the popular asso- 
ciations of the day for the promotion of the Abolition of 
Slavery. Yet do you not find that in nearly or quite 
every instance in which it has done so, it has called the 
attention of its members to its testimony against that 
evil, and exhorted them against apathy or indifference 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 243 

on the subject ? Beside which, I find you claiming to 
your own influence, and to your members while with 
us, the authorship of the Epistle in 1836, and of the Ke- 
port in 1838, they being the two first instances in which 
such advice was issued. Now, if through your influence 
the advice was given in 1836 and in 1838, how T can it be 
any cause of your secession because it was renewed in 
1840 and 1841 ? 

" You give it as another cause of your separation from 
the Yearly Meeting, that it ' directed its meeting-houses 
closed against the advocates of emancipation.' But 
when we turn to the Minutes of the meeting to see 
whether it really did direct its meeting-houses closed 
against the advocates of emancipation, w T e cannot find 
such directions. Had it done so it must have directed 
them closed against all its consistent members. We do, 
however, find that it advised against the practice of 
opening its meeting-houses for the purpose of holding 
Anti-Slavery meetings and delivering lectures, as being 
contrary to the general usage of Society and of hurtful 
tendency to its members. Now if this advice, as you 
say, has a tendency to weaken the cause of emancipation 
and strengthen the bands of Slavery, why did you ever 
publish it ? Why did you tell the slaveholder of it ? 
Was it because you wished to strengthen his hands, 
and weaken those of such out of the pale of our reli- 
gious society as the Yearly Meeting has said, it was c a 
satisfaction to it to find were awakened to a lively 
sense of the iniquities and horrors of Slavery, as now r 
existing in the United States, and are made willing to 
become, on gospel principles, the open advocates of suf- 
fering and degraded humanity, and are laboring on the 
grounds which we, as a religious society, have for many 
years occupied in relation to this subject ;' and which it 
has said, it 'desires to encourage in this good work,' and 
exhorts its members to be so alive to our testimony 
against Slavery as to throw no discouragements in their 
way ? You give it as a cause of your secession that it 
would have such an effect; then, if so, why did you so far 



244 HISTORY 0# THE SEPARATION IK 

disregard the aforesaid advice of the Yearly Meeting as 
to publish it, and that, too, in the worst light you could ? 
Discouraging as you say it was to them, it appears that 
it was not as much so as you wished it to be. 

" You say it directed, which you say on other occa- 
sions is very different from advice. You say it directed 
them closed against the advocates of emancipation ; 
whereas it only advised against the practice of opening 
them for the purpose of holding Anti-Slavery meetings 
and delivering lectures. Now I cannot see how you 
could have separated on this account, for if it is objec- 
tionable at all, you have made it worse — if the advocates 
of emancipation, out of the pale of our religious society, 
would be weakened by it, you alone published it to 
them — if the slaveholder would be strengthened by it, 
you gave him that strength ; we did not, for whenever 
we appear before him we appear on the side of the cause 
of Abolition. 

u I must, therefore, seek for other causes than these for 
your separation, but before I do so 1 wish to ask you a 
few questions: Even admitting your beloved theory, that 
the Anti-Slavery cause means yourselves, is it a greater 
one than the salvation of the immortal soul ? Now if a 
portion of your members were in the practice of opening 
your meeting-houses for the purpose of holding meetings 
to pray by appointment for the salvation of the immor- 
tal soul, and to deliver sermons in, having for their ob- 
ject the same most righteous cause, would you not dis- 
courage the practice as being contrary to the general 
usage of Society, and of hurtful tendency to your mem- 
bers ? and if so, would you be justly chargeable with 
going against the cause of religion, and strengthening 
the hands of the infidel? And if those members should 
disregard your advice and publish you to the world and 
other Christian professors as having thrown your influ- 
ence on the side of anti-christianity, and offer, as an evi- 
dence, that you directed your meeting-houses closed 
against the advocates of the Lord Jesus Christ, would 
you not think you were used very unfriendly ? Would 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 245 

you not call such publications base slanders ? I believe 
you would; but with no better grounds than we have to 
call yours such, in the case before us. 

" This comparison, which I believe to be a just one, 
might be viewed a little further. You might not only be 
accused as above, but if the supposed separatists were to 
indulge in the same spirit some of you appear to indulge 
in, they would in all probability endeavor to unchristian- 
ize you altogether in the view of the public, not only be- 
cause (as they would say) you had directed your meeting- 
houses closed against the advocates of the Christian reli- 
gion, but w<ould offer as an additional evidence that you 
were no Christians, because you were not actively labor- 
ing in their way in endeavoring to enlighten the public 
sentiment on the subject. That you would not preach for 
its advancement yourselves, unless divinely moved there- 
to ; nor suffer your members to hire others to do so. 
Thus they might endeavor to make the public believe that 
you had no just claims to the Christian religion, but were 
on the contrary, actively engaged in endeavoring to sup- 
press it, with full as much regard for the truth as you 
have in endeavoring to show that Indiana Yearly Meet- 
ing is actively engaged in endeavoring to suppress the 
abolition of Slavery. 

" You publish, as another cause for your separation, 
that the Yearly Meeting, by a special act, deprived you 
of ' any privilege in regard to the transaction of any of 
its important business,' and that 'subordinate meetings 
were advised to pursue the same course of conduct down 
to the most remote and subordinate branches. 5 The 
above is what you tell the world, whether to weaken the 
hands of those out of the pale of our religious society, 
who are honestly laboring to promote the cause of eman- 
cipation, and to strengthen the hands of the slaveholder 
or not, I shall not pretend to decide. But here is what 
the Yearly Meeting did say : c Friends are advised to be 
weighty and deliberate in making appointments to any 
of the important stations or committees in Society, so that 
faithful and trusty Friends may be chosen ; as we believe 

11* 



24:6 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

that those who have distinguished themselves by opposi- 
tion or disregard to the advices and travail of the body, 
are manifestly unsuitable for important services in it while 
they remain in that situation.' Now, is this the first 
time you ever knew Friends to advise to be weighty and 
deliberate in making appointments to important services 
in Society ? Why is it objectionable now, and never be- 
fore ? Or is it, really, not its advice on this subject that 
you object to (although you say it is), but the expression 
of a sentiment that those who have distinguished them- 
selves by opposition, etc., are not suitable to fill impor- 
tant stations in Society, while they remain in that situa- 
tion ? I suppose this is what you intended to say caused 
you to secede. But is it not good also ? If any of its 
members were so regardless of the Advices of the body as 
to be engaged in endeavoring to throw discouragements 
in the way of such out of the pale of our religious soci- 
ety as were honestly laboring on gospel principles for the 
abolition of Slavery, by telling them and the slaveholders 
that the Society of Friends who had heretofore been dis- 
tinguished for their zeal in promoting the cause of the 
abolition of Slavery, were now throwing their weight and 
influence in the ' Pro-Slavery scale, 5 and were now act- 
ively engaged in endeavoring to put down the cause of 
emancipation, would such be suitable to fill important 
stations in Society ? Would not such as had distin- 
guished themselves by promoting the publication of such 
libels against the Society, be manifestly unsuitable for 
important services in it? I think they would; and 
that, wherever meetings were enabled to put in practice 
the advice of the Yearly Meeting, c to be weighty and 
deliberate in making appointments to important stations 
or committees in Society,' such were excluded. Let us 
view this cause for separation a little further ; and allow 
me, without offense, to ask you candidly : did you indeed 
secede because you were not appointed to important sta- 
tions and committees in Society ? Do you own that you 
seceded because you could not be appointed to some sta- 
tion that you desired ? If not, why do you give it as a 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 247 

cause of separation ? There is some evidence at least, 
beside your giving it as a cause of your separation that 
such was the fact, in what I am informed took place at 
one of your caucus meetings at Newport, daring the time 
of our Yearly Meeting, in 1842. The object of the meet- 
ing appeared to be to endeavor to devise means to secure 
your standing in Society, thus showing that your desires 
for appointments were so great that you would even hold 
meetings to endeavor to secure them. 

" Another cause as given by you for your separation, 
and so published to the world, is the removal of some 
members from the Meeting for Sufferings without giving 
the causes. This was not unprecedented in our Yearly 
Meeting, ■ your assertions to the contrary notwithstand- 
ing.' In the year 1828 a number of members were re- 
ported by the Meeting for Sufferings to the Yearly Meet- 
ing as delinquents, and released accordingly, and other 
Friends appointed in their places. There was a number 
of members of that meeting appointed by the Quarters in 
like manner reported, but as their names are not on the 
Yearly Meeting's Minutes, 1 can refer to them only from 
recollection. You will perhaps say, here was a reason 
given, and that too, one recognized by Discipline. But 
here again your desire to have it so, has got before the 
facts. The Minute does not say for delinquency in the 
attendance of the Meeting for Sufferings, as the Discip- 
line does, but simply ' delinquency ;' beside which it 
was well known that most of them were diligent attend- 
ers of those meetings up to near or quite the one that re- 
ported them, and one or more of them were present at 
that meeting. Neither had they all gone off in the sepa- 
ration that had then taken place. There were at least 
three of them that I remember had not, and two of those 
three never did. Of those released in 1842, all have se- 
ceded. You particularly complain of no reasons being 
given for the removal in 1842, which it seems to me you 
must see, upon the least impartial reflection, would have 
been very improper and directly opposed to good order. 
I think the Yearly Meeting has never given a reason for 



248 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

a removal from appointment in any case (and such re- 
movals have been frequent), except in cases of death, 
disownment from the Society, removal, or request. To 
do so would, in my opinion, be a direct violation of that 
clause of Discipline which says : - And to prevent the 
introduction of all unnecessary and premature com- 
plaints to meetings of business, it is advised, that if any 
member shall have cause of complaint against another, it 
be mentioned to the Overseers, who are to see that the 
party complained of has been treated with according to 
gospel order, previous to the case being reported to the 
Preparative or Monthly meeting.' Now, if it is a viola- 
tion of our order to introduce a complaint, into any of our 
Preparative or Monthly meetings, until after the case 
shall have been inspected by the Overseers, it would cer- 
tainly be a greater one to introduce it into a Quarterly 
or Yearly Meeting. If those Friends who were released 
had been guilty of a violation of our Discipline, and had 
on that account been reported as disqualified, and the 
meeting had named and recorded the violation, they 
would, in my opinion, let them have been ever so guilty, 
have had just cause of complaint against the procedure. 
What would or could the Yearly Meeeting do in such a 
case? Would, or could it disown them? Would it ap- 
point a committee to treat with them and report to next 
Yearly Meeting ? Or, would it have directed the case to 
the Monthly meetings to which they belonged, thus 
taking upon itself the business of a Preparative meeting, 
a meeting subordinate to a Monthly meeting? What 
would the right of appeal be worth to a member disowned 
by such a course of proceeding, the highest appellate body 
being the accuser ? 

u I know that you say the Friends removed in 1842 
from the Meeting for Sufferings, were charged — publicly 
censured before the world, etc. I own that they were 
reported to the Yearly Meeting by the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings, as disqualified for usefulness in that meeting, and 
released from the services thereof. But did that charge 
them with any violation of Discipline, or any immoral 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 249 

conduct whatever ? We know it did not, nor was it so 
intended. How often have good and worthy members of 
our society been named on committees, and to fill im- 
portant stations in Society, and not appointed because 
they were believed not to be qualified, or in other words 
disqualified for discharging the duties thereof? Even for 
as important stations as those of Ministers and Elders, 
individuals are sometimes named in our Monthly meet- 
ings, after having been approved by the Preparative and 
Quarterly meetings of Ministers and Elders ; and there 
objected to as not qualified. What but a spirit of ' self- 
confidence,' could make a member even think of seceding 
from the Society, because he was judged not qualified for 
the important station of an Elder, Overseer, Clerk, or 
member of the Meeting for Sufferings, or of the African 
or Indian Committee ? And what better evidence of dis- 
qualification can there be, than a desire for appointments 
to important stations in Society, whereby to rule the 
Church of Christ ? Perhaps you will say that in all such 
cases as I have alluded to, as being in some degree com- 
mon in our society, they were never published to the 
world — they were only among Friends — brethren of the 
same family, etc. ; whereas those judged disqualified in 
1842, were, to use your own words, published to the 
world as transgressors, and I confess in this you have 
cause of complaint. But who are guilty ? Who told 
' the world' of any such procedure ? Your public prints, 
and yours only, so far as I know or believe. Our printed 
Minutes, and the Address to our members immediately 
after your separation, in which alone the circumstance 
is alluded to, were to our members alone, and not for the 
public. I need not endeavor to show you how the publi- 
cation, in the light in which you have held it up before 
the world, would be calculated to weaken the hands of 
those out of the pale of our religious society, who are 
honestly laboring on gospel principles for the abolition 
of Slavery, for you have done it sufficiently yourselves, 
and upon your heads it must rest. 

" In addition to the removals, in 1828, from the Meet- 



250 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

ing for Sufferings, which I have already noticed, there 
were a number released from the standing committees of 
the Yearly Meeting, on African and Indian concerns ; 
without charging them with any immoral conduct, or any 
departure from our faith, doctrines, or testimonies. In 
the case of those removed from the former committee it 
was, 1 believe, exactly in the words of the removal, in 
1842, of which you complain, that is, for disqualification. 
In the other case, they were merely reported and released 
without saying they were delinquents in any respect, or 
in any way disqualified ; which is perhaps in general, 
the better way. As an individual, I am inclined to be- 
lieve it is, yet while the meeting carefully avoids charg- 
ing the individuals with any violation of our order, but 
simply stating that they are disqualified, or delinquents; 
if objectionable at all, it is certainly not sufficiently so to 
justify a secession from the Society* If it was in 1842, it 
certainly was in 1828, for a part of those released from 
the African Committee and c held up to the world as 
transgressors' (just as much, so far as Society was con- 
cerned, as in any subsequent cases), had not then gone 
off in that Separation, but were there present in the meet- 
ing, but afterward seceded. Now the question is, was 
the Yearly Meeting of 1828 justly chargeable with his or 
their secession ? You will perhaps say no, for you know 
that several of you were then active in reporting and re- 
leleasing them. But if it was not a justifiable cause for 
leaving our society and joining in the Separation then, 
why is it now ? I leave it with you to consider. 

u I think I have now abundantly shown that the act of 
removal, in 1842, even if it was not the best that might 
have been, is fully sustained by previous proceedings of 
the Yearly Meeting, in which you, in common with other 
members, took an active part ; it therefore only remains 
for me on this head to notice your charge of its being 
contrary to Discipline. In some of your publications you 
say it was contrary to the plain letter of Discipline, while 
in others you are a little more moderate and only say it 
was unauthorized by Discipline. The latter you may 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 251 

believe, but I can not see how you can the former, 
although you plainly charge the Yearly Meeting in your 
Declaration, intended for the information of the public, 
that it was contrary to the ' plain letter of Discipline,' 
and thus cause, I have no doubt, many to be deceived. 
What plain letter of Discipline was violated ? Can you 
pretend to say it was contrary to the plain letter of the 
following clause, viz : c Any [members] declining, or 
greatly neglecting their attendance, the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings are to notify said meeting or meetings [the meet- 
ing by which they had been appointed] of such delin- 
quency, in order that the places of those may be supplied 
by new appointments.' This is a plain letter of Discip- 
line for notifying the Yearly or Quarterly meeting, as the 
case may be, of delinquency in the attendance of meet- 
ings, but for no other delinquency ; yet are we on that 
account to suppose that any other proceeding, though in 
no way violating this or any other clause, is not only un- 
authorized, but contrary to the plain letter of Discipline i 
Certainly not. The Discipline directs that Quarterly 
and Monthly meetings should appoint committees annu- 
ally, to nominate Clerks ; now if a Preparative should be 
in the practice of doing so also,, would it be a plain viola- 
tion of Discipline ? In either case the Discipline is silent, 
and therefore neither can be a violation of it. Again, 
according to the grounds taken by you the plainest cases 
of disqualification, even that of mental derangement, 
could not be removed unless the subject greatly neglected 
the attendance of the meetings, without a violation of the 
plain letter of Discipline. 

" It seems tome that I have now answered all the 
leading causes given by you for your separation from our 
religious Society, and that if you will in like manner 
view the facts of the case impartially (instead of the ver- 
sion given by them in your publications), you can find 
no better grounds for your secession than are shown in 
the foregoing remarks. In the situation in which you 
are now placed, I think I am in a good degree sensible 
of the difficulty that will attend all your efforts (should 



252 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

you be disposed to make any,) to enter into an impartial 
examination ; for, in order to do so, it will be necessary 
to divest yourselves as much as possible from the party 
feelings you have been leavened into by the course you 
have already taken. I, however, from a degree of expe- 
rience, would most earnestly entreat of you, to make the 
trial, individually. I say, from a degree of experience ; 
for, many years ago, I became convinced in my mind, 
and that too in a great measure through the ministry and 
public declarations of my friend, Charles Osborne, that it 
was best and most safe for Friends, in the maintenance 
and support of their Christian testimonies, to dwell much 
alone, and not be reckoned among the nations. O how 
I have heard him in times past declare in the love and 
fervency of the Gospel, the danger of Friends being 
drawn away from the purity and simplicity of our pro- 
fession, by mixing in the popular associations of the day, 
even for the promotion of works purely benevolent. Al- 
though we might rejoice that others had become con- 
vinced of one or more of our Christian testimonies, it 
would not do for us to leave our standard to go and help 
them exalt theirs, for in so doing we should lower our 
own. But rather, he used to say, let us thank God, and 
take courage, rallying close to our standard, exalting it 
as an ensign to the people, that others seeing our good 
works, might glorify our Father who is in heaven. Thus 
he used to plead with us, frequently naming the temper- 
ance, Anti-Slavery, and peace societies. With me and 
many others, such appeals to our religious feelings were 
not in vain. But when in relation to Anti-Slavery soci- 
eties it was proposed that Friends should form an associ- 
ation of their own on that subject, I did not see any dan- 
ger or inconsistency in our doing so, but, on the contrary, 
feeling as I did, and still do, much interest in the promo- 
tion of the cause, I thought it might advance the work. 
In this situation I remained a considerable length of time, 
being prevented from pushing forward such an associa- 
tion only through the judgment of other friends, and al- 
though I believed they wished me well, I found it hard 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 253 

work to believe they wished as well to the An ti- Slavery- 
cause as they ought. I thought if they did, they could 
not object to such an association as was proposed. Thus 
the accuser of the brethren was finding entrance, and it 
was not without a considerable effort, that I was enabled 
so far to overcome rny prejudices in favor of such an 
institution, as to give the subject a candid and impartial 
examination. But when I succeeded in doing so, I 
thought, and still think, that such a course would be cal- 
culated to divide and scatter us, both in feeling and 
action ; and thus lessen, instead of increase, our ability 
to do good for the advancement of the cause for which 
the association would have been intended. Beside 
which, other Friends might, with equal propriety, form 
a Friends' Peace Society, others again a Friends' Tem- 
perance Society, and so on, until we would, or might be 
separated into as many divisions as the Jews were at the 
time of the siege of Jerusalem, or as we have testimonies 
to bear to the world. For it is to be presumed that the 
members of each association would consider such Friends 
as were not connected with them, as deficient in their 
particular testimony. I thought I saw, that instead of 
having our whole influence to bear against the several evils 
of war, slavery, intemperance, and a number of others that 
might be named, as it now does, we would at least, be in 
great danger of having a part only, and could not in any 
event have more than all. Perhaps some of you may say 
my reasoning is not good, for the Society of Friends are 
not Anti-Slavery, but Pro-Slavery. To such I would 
say, is it an evidence that your Society is in favor of 
war, because you have not formed a Friends' Peace Soci- 
ety ? or that it is in favor of oaths, because you have not 
formed a Friends' Anti-oath Association? etc., etc. I 
have now, in addition to my expostulation with you on 
the causes that you say forced you to secede, told you 
how it fared with me in relation to a Friends' Anti- 
Slavery association, mainly because the opposition to it 
is urged by you as an evidence of our unsoundness in re- 
lation to our testimony against Slavery, when issuing 

12 



254 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

Advices against our members joining in the popular, or 
mixed associations of the day, and would here conclude 
this Address after again earnestly entreating you once 
more to give the whole subject a serious and impartial 
examination, were it not for that pernicious publication 
issued from the press at Newport. Unless the character 
of that paper is changed, and made what it professes to 
be, an Antl Slavery paper, instead of an Anti-Quaker • 
one, vain will be your attempts to give the subject an 
impartial examination, while you believe its version of 
affairs. It is true that sometimes there are Anti-Slavery 
pieces in it, but they are few and far between. Its lead- 
ing object appears to be the condemnation of another 
class of friends of the slave. One thing that appears as 
inconsistent to me as your secession itself, and which, 
like that, I scarcely know whether to attribute most to 
selfishness or delusion, is your continually holding forth 
to one another and the world, that the A nti Slavery 
cause, or cause of emancipation, means yourselves and 
your measures only. It reminds me of the grounds 
taken by the Church of Rome against all other religions 
societies in arrogating to itself the title of the Catholic 
Church, and holding that all others are spurious. That 
it, itself, is the Church of Christ on earth, just like you 
assume to believe, that you are the Anti-Slavery cause. 
' How much better would it be, 5 in the words of our late 
Yearly Meeting, 'if those who profess to be opposed to 
Slavery were to bring their testimony to bear on the sys- 
tem itself, rather than to waste their strength and influ- 
ence, by publishing criminations against others.' Such 
appears to be the present course pursued by the Cincin- 
nati Herald, with the exception of a few pieces, generally 
written by some of you, and which the editor appears to 
think he must admit in order to maintain the character 
of the paper as a free press. He says in a late number, 
as near as I can remember (not having the paper before 
me), that he is determined not to quarrel, or impugn the 
motives of any man or class of men, however they may 
differ from him in reference to the mode of advocacy, if 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 255 

they are honestly engaged on the subject. A noble res- 
olution, and far better would it be for the cause, if all the 
friends of the slave would adopt a similar course. Look 
at the two publications, and you will soon see that while 
one is laboring to bring all the Anti-Slavery feeling to 
bear upon the system of Slavery, and to expose its evil 
both on the master and slave, and its encroachments on 
the free States, the other appeared to fce as zealously en- 
gaged in pushing away all feeling, all influence, all acts 5 
that come up and join its ranks. You say much against 
proscription, while you are full of it yourselves. Look 
at the resolutions passed at almost any Anti-Slavery 
meeting where you are the ruling members. Fro* 
scription has become so much the order of the day with 
you, on the subject of Abolition, that you are ready 
to introduce it to aid other reforms also. At a late tem- 
perance meeting, where two or three of your members 
were present, one of them introduced a resolution to the 
effect, that all who did not sign the pledge were giving 
their aid and strength to support drunkenness. In advo- 
cating such a resolution you were virtually saying that 
many of your own members were giving their aid to 
support drunkenness, just like you say our Society is 
giving its aid to strengthen Slavery, because it advised 
its members not to join the mixed Anti-Slavery societies 
of the day, and at the same time claim to your influence 
the Epistle of 1836, and Report of 1838, in which the 
Advice was first issued. To what shall I attribute such 
proscription from the Temperance, or Anti-Slavery cause, 
as would induce you (though no doubt inadvertently) to 
condemn yourselves, if not to blindness, in your course ? 
You also say in your public paper, that at the close of the 
meeting on First-day, at the Yearly Meeting, in 1842, 
you saw greater honor shown to Henry Clay than you 
had ever before seen Friends show to any man however 
good or great — \ such eagerness to shake his blood-stained 
hands,' etc. You then go on to say, it may however be 
pleaded as an extenuation of the great honors bestowed 
upon him by their eagerness to shake his blood-stained 



256 HISTORY Otf THE SEPARATION Itt 

hands, their strong desire to evince to his mind their de- 
termined opposition to Abolitionists. Now why all this, 
but to endeavor to show that Friends shook hands with 
him because he was a slaveholder; and for what, I would 
ask, did you shake hands with him ! I confidently believe 
that in proportion to the relative numbers in attendance 
at that place, there were more that shook hands with him 
who were members of Anti-Slavery societies than of those 
w 7 ho were not. I allude to Friends only. Of those in 
one large Preparative meeting, so far as I know or believe, 
they were all enrolled members of Anti-Slavery societies; 
which has led me to believe it was in a good degree so in 
other places also. Now the question occurs, did they do 
so to 'evince to his mind their determined opposition to 
Abolitionists?' 1 do not believe they, or anybody else 
did. I wish it distinctly understood, that I do not blame 
them or anybody else for shaking hands with Henry 
Clay or any other man, provided it be done in a friendly 
and becoming manner ; but that to which I would call 
your attention is the construction you put upon it. 

u Many other instances of a like character to the fore- 
going might be pointed out; but I have already written 
more than I intended, and would now, in conclusion, so- 
berly and candidly ask of you, what can possibly be gained 
either to you, as Christians, or to the Anti-Slavery cause 
by continuing in such a course? If the testimony of 
Friends against Slavery has, in times past, had any 
influence in the world, are not such things calculated to 
do it away? Is not telling the slaveholder and others 
who connive at that system of injustice and oppression, 
that the Society of Friends are throwing their influence 
against the cause of emancipation, strengthening their 
hands (so far as your words are credited), as far as our 
Society and its testimony against that evil can have any 
effect? It seems to me that it is, and that it is a subject 
that ought to claim your serious consideration. 

" But so long as you are building one another up with 
6uch false insinuations, as I have endeavored to point 
out, and many more that might be mentioned, you will 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 257 

find but little place to give your whole course of conduct 
an impartial examination; which makes me the more 
earnestly entreat of you to endeavor to clivest yourselves 
of their baneful influence. Seek for ability to enable 
you to cast down the accuser of the brethren, that you 
may be enabled to see your situation as it really is, and 
to return again to the Society from whence you have 
gone out. Be assured that notwithstanding the unme- 
rited abuse that some of you have poured upon us, we 
would rejoice at your return ; believing that many of you 
have been drawn away by being made to believe that 
you had no other alternative, but to forsake the cause of 
the slave or our religious society. With what grounds 
an impartial examination will show; which, that you 
may give it, is the earnest desire of your friend, 

" George Evans. 

"Spiceland, First Month, 1844." 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

"A Reply to a Document entitled 'An Expostulation to those who have 
lately seceded from the Society of Friends. 

" It is matter of astonishment, that any person pre- 
tending to advocate the doctrine of unconditional sub- 
mission to the Advice of the ' body' — that it is the duty 
of members of Society to comply with such advice, right 
or wrong, as the author of this document has clone, even 
in a Monthly meeting, and at the same time act in open 
violation of it, as he has in thus writing and publishing 
this pamphlet. In 1811, the Yearly Meeting declared, 
in regard to an Address, written by a Friend, on the 
subject of one of our important testimonies, and circu- 
lated without undergoing the examination of a Meeting 
for Sufferings, that they felt called upon to express their 
disapprobatio7i of such proceedings. How then dare 
he, holding, as he does, that it is a duty to submit in all 



258 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

cases whatsoever (for he made no exception), thus noto- 
riously to distinguish himself by opposition and disregard 
thereto. He is, by his own showing, manifestly unsuit- 
able for the important stations he occupies. [See 4th 
page of 4 Expostulation.'] 

"And it is equally astonishing that, advocating this 
doctrine, which, as to its effects upon individuals and the 
cause of Truth, must be the same as the doctrine of the 
infallibility of the Church, he should find fault with 
others if they should take the same ground ; that is, the 
position of the Church of Rome in regard to her claim of 
being the only true Church, and consequently that all 
should obey her mandates. By comparing his position 
with that of this Church, we shall find him cast in the 
shade. She holds that the Church cannot err, and, there- 
fore, all should obey. He holds, that if she does err, it 
is our duty to obey. Thus, in either case, submission is 
positive duty. Thus far they are alike. But she does 
not broach the astounding absurdity of our author, that 
it is right to do wrong, and, of course, wrong to do right ; 
and hence he is much behind her in point of consistency. 

44 When opponents exhibit a spirit of candor and a 
disposition to elicit the Truth by stating matters of fact 
only, and representing truly and fairly the point at issue, 
a discussion can be prosecuted with pleasure; but the 
course ours have taken in every document they have 
issued, makes it a very unpleasant task, because we are 
under the necessity of exposing and contradicting them. 

14 It is worthy of remark, that the writer of this docu- 
ment, like his predecessor, the author of the anonymous 
Review of our Declaration, has, in endeavoring to make 
our reasons for seceding appear as insignificant and con- 
temptible as possible, represented us as saying, that we 
seceded because of the existence of some one circum- 
stance named in the ' Declaration ;' and that perhaps 
incidentally spoken of, or referred to, as one evidence of 
the existence of the two grand defects which we deemed 
just cause of separation, as set forth in the first Minute 
of our Yearly Meeting, namely, a departure, on the part 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 259 

of Indiana Yearly Meeting, from the true and genuine 
principles of Friends in regard to our testimony against 
Slavery, and for its arbitrary, proscriptive, and unchris- 
tian measures toward us. For instance, he says, on his 
first page : ' You say you seceded because the Yearly 
Meeting advised its members against joining in the 
popular associations of the day for the promotion of the 
abolition of Slavery.' If the reader will turn to our 
Declaration and trace the history of that advice up to 
the Yearly Meeting of 1842, he will find that the object 
was to show the unsoundness of the ruling party, inas- 
much as some of them who were endeavoring to enforce 
submission to this advice, were actively engaged in mixed 
associations of a different character, and in supporting, to 
some extent, the Colonization scheme, contrary to the ad- 
vice of the same body. And again, rendering this advice 
against joining Anti-Slavery societies equivalent to a 
positive injunction, was referred to, among other things, 
in justification of our course in seceding, or as exhibit- 
ing a necessity for it, for thereby liberty of conscience 
was prohibited, that dearest of rights, on account of the 
prostration of which many of our forefathers suffered 
even unto death. These were the objects in speaking of 
this advice, and not to give the fact of its being issued as 
a cause in itself of separation. But if such had been 
the case, what boy of ten years old, after reading the 
Declaration of American Independence, would think of 
referring to one out of the long catalogue of abuses there 
charged upon the king of England, and then declare that 
the American Colonies said tfcey seceded from the British 
crown because the king had done this one act; but there 
would be just as much sense in it, as there is in his asserting, 
that we seceded because of the issuing of this advice, even 
if we had given it as a reason. Much that is said in the 
Declaration is a mere history of facts. Why did he not say 
also that we declared we seceded because the Yearly Meet- 
ing issued the advice to cast no discouragement in the way 
of those who are laboring to promote universal emancipa- 
tion ? This also is mentioned as well as the other 



260 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

advice. By a comparison of the facts referred to, argu- 
ments are derived, establishing the position taken in the 
Minutes of our Yearly Meeting already quoted. For 
example, the treatment of Henry Clay and C. C. Bcr- 
leigh, by Friends, is referred to; but who cannot see, 
except our writing opposers, that these circumstances 
were spoken of to show with whom they had the most 
sympathy, a slaveholder or a modern Abolitionist, and 
that the comparison was instituted to prove the grand 
point, a departure from genuine principles, and that they 
w T ere not mentioned as in themselves causes of separa- 
tion ! And here I would call the attention of the reader 
to the fact that they have never once noticed any of our 
arguments derived from the sources just alluded to. 
Why is it thus ? I say let the intelligent and impartial 
decide. 

" Our author queries, { do you not find that in nearly or 
quite every instance, in which it (the Yearly Meeting) 
has advised its members against joining in the popular 
associations of the day for the promotion of the abolition 
of Slavery, it has called the attention of its members to 
its testimony against that evil, and exhorted them against 
apathy or indifference on the subject V 

"It appears that it was not consistent with the object 
of his Expostulation, professedly conducted under a dis- 
position to make an 'impartial examination, 5 to explain 
the consistency of such calls and exhortations, with the 
efforts of some of their delegations to the Legislatures of 
Ohio and Indiana, to convince the members thereof that 
the Society of Friends were not Abolitionists, and held no 
connection with them. It was doubtless foreign to his 
object to show T the consistency of such profession of Anti- 
Slavery zeal with the conduct of some of their leaders in 
assuring Henry Clay that the Society had no hand in 
getting up the petition, presented to him at Richmond, 
asking him to liberate his slaves ; or with the conduct of 
the Yearly Meeting, in rejecting the accounts from diffe- 
rent Quarterly meetings, that a deficiency existed among 
Friends in regard to our testimony against Slavery; 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 261 

declaring Slavery, in opposition to such evidence, that no 
such deficiency appeared ; such accounts being mainly pre- 
dicated, at least, in our author's own Quarterly meeting, as 
he well knows, upon the fact that the abolition of Slavery 
was objected to by one or more, and that one even argued 
that Slavery was right. All these, and a host of other cir- 
cumstances of a similar character, which might be enume- 
rated, showing conclusively, that their professions and 
actions were totally irreconcilable, it seems, did not come 
within the sphere of his impartial investigations. 

"Page 1, he says: ■ ISTow, if through your influence 
the advice (not to associate with others) was given in 
1836, and in 1S38, how can it be an}^ cause of your seces- 
sion, because it was renewed in 1840 and in 1841?' This 
perhaps has been sufficiently answered already, inasmuch 
as I have shown we never gave that as a cause ; but the 
reader should bear in mind, that it was the Anti-Slavery 
publications, ' the Minutes, Epistles, and Address, 5 of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting of former time, which onr oppo- 
nents held vp as evidence of their Anti-Slavery, charac- 
ter, which we asserted were most, if not all, brought 
forth by the influence of those they have since proscribed, 
and whom the3 r at that time opposed, and, in so doing, 
tried to prevent the adoption of the aforesaid documents. 
[See both sides of the question, page 11.] It was not 
that advice of which he speaks, which we claimed, for it 
was that which they opposed at the time of its adoption ; 
but this they w T ere anxious to have inserted. We ad- 
mitted, however [see printed Minutes, first Yearly Meet- 
ing, page 10], that some of the real friends of the cause 
of immediate emancipation at first were opposed to mix- 
ing with others, but they were consistent. They w^ere 
opposed to joining any mixed association whatever: but 
not so with the opposite class, as was evinced by their 
conduct. And they seized the opportunity of assisting 
to issue this advice, but with very different motives. 
They were prompted to action by opposition to modern 
abolition societies. [For proof, see anonymous Review, 
which was, no doubt, written by some of those very indi- 



262 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

victuals.] The former class were induced to favor the 
advice, through a fear that uniting with others might 
lead to a compromise of our principles, not discovering 
what use might be made of it ; for the} 7 never thought of its 
being converted into anything more than mere advice. 

"But it should be remembered, that the advice issued 
in 1836, was merely to consider whether the time had not 
arrived, in which it would be most safe for members of 
our religious society to refrain from becoming members 
of other societies, etc. Now, although there is in this 
an apparent distrust of there being a propriety in our 
becoming members of benevolent societies, yet I conceive 
that those who took the subject under consideration, as 
suggested, let them have acted as they might afterward, 
acted in accordance with the advice. And if it had 
been c renewed in 1840 and '41 ' in this form, and left 
upon the same ground upon which it was originally 
given, it would have caused no difficulty. The advice 
contained in the last paragraph of the Report of the com- 
mittee on the concerns of the People of Color in 1838, 
of which he speaks, c to abstain from mixing with these 
associations,' is a production of their own, and the adop- 
tion of it was opposed by some, if not all, of the Aboli- 
tionists present at the time it was made out. It is no 
Anti-Slavery advice, neither did they hold it up as evi- 
dence of their Anti-Slavery character, and, therefore, we 
did not claim it. And I ask those acquainted with our 
documents, if we have not heretofore given them credit 
to a full share in the authorship of this advice, even in 
its original form ? Why, then, pretend that we claimed 
it to ourselves ? 

u But it is a little remarkable that the writer of the 
document before me, after the demonstrations we have 
had, should endeavor to palm it upon the minds of the 
people, that the ruling part of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
desire to cast no discouragements in the way of modern 
Abolitionism, or Abolition societies. This is obviously 
his aim. Now it is well known that he is one among 
the many who sanctioned the anonymous Review of our 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 263 

Declaration, which was commended and widely circulated 
by leading members of that party. We then hear him 
on the back of his pretensions of love to that cause, in 
reply to the assertion that Abolition societies have done 
much good, saying, ; not modern Abolition institutions 
it should be remembered,' these hold principles and 
practices unworthy of such good men as Mifflin and 
JPemberton. Various other expressions are used in that 
document showing that he holds them in contempt. 
Truly, I hope, to use his own words, we will give this 
subject an ' impartial examination.' And in doing this, 
it will be necessary, as he makes profession of having 
come out of error in regard to Abolition, and, therefore, 
I suppose, thinks he is prepared to give advice, in order 
that it may have its just weight, to notice some particu- 
lar facts. About the time ' the accuser of the brethren ' 
had got possession of his mind, or ' was finding en- 
trance, 5 he was heard to ask the question, ' how much 
worse is it to hire a slave to work with us, and pay the 
master, than to let the slave work under the immediate 
control and treatment of the master, and we pay him 
for what the slave produces ?' This was the substance of 
the interrogatory. This makes it evident that he saw 
the matter clearly as it is. But since the accuser of the 
brethren has been cast out, he has been heard frequently 
to say he c can't feel conscientious in regard to using 
slave-labor produce,' and when on being asked how it 
happened that he once took sides with Charles Osborne 
in advocating the rightfulness and necessity of abstain- 
ing from the use of such productions, he replied, he did 
it to encourage others who did feel conscientious. He is 
aware that the slave is held in bondage in order to ob- 
tain the produce of his labor for consumption, but he 
cannot feel conscientious against consuming it, and of 
course, to be consistent, cannot feel conscientious against 
holding slaves. When the accuser of the brethren was 
operating in his mind, he declared himself in favor of 
voting for Abolitionists, but when he cast him out, he 
went and voted for Harrison, the Pro-Slavery man, and 



264 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

Tyler, the slaveholder; and since then, when a thorough- 
going Anti-Slavery man was before the people as a can- 
didate for Congress, instead of voting for him, he cast 
his suffrage for a stanch opposer of the Liberty Party, 
and a villifier of the Abolitionists. When he was under 
the influence of this accuser, he was strongly in favor of 
helping fugitives to Canada, but since he has got from 
under it, he justifies the proceedings of North Carolina 
Yearly Meeting in censuring for such a practice in any 
way whatever. And finally, to cap the climax, he comes 
out with the document under review, which is a tissue of 
unfounded accusations, either directly or by insinuation, 
almost from beo-inniuo; to end. But here I would remark, 
that 1 am tar from representing a person as acting under 
the influence of the accuser of the brethren, for stating 
truly, in a proper manner to them their position (no 
matter what they have done), in order to correct that 
which is wrong. If I were to, I should apply this epithet 
to all the prophets, apostles, and good men, in every age 
and clime. 

"Page 2d, he says : 'But when we turn to the Minutes 
of the meeting, to see whether it really did direct its 
meeting-houses closed against the advocates of emanci- 
pation we cannot find such directions. Had it done so, 
it must have directed them closed against all its consis- 
tent members.' 

" I suppose he means such consistent members as he is 
himself, who advocate emancipation by voting for slave- 
holders, and paying the master for holding the slave, and 
extorting his labor by the lash, and villifying modern 
Abolitionists. Now it will be seen, by examination, that 
in this there is an effort to make something out of noth- 
ing. He represents us as saying that the Yearly Meet- 
ing directed its meeting-houses closed. I should like to 
know where he finds what he has quoted. It may be 
possible that some individual may have thus represented 
the matter, but I feel confident that, as a Society, we never 
have, and we do not think of charging Indiana Yearly 
Meeting with uttering what is written in this document 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 265 

under consideration, only so far as it may indorse it. 
But we did say that the Yearly Meeting l refused the use 
of meeting-houses to Anti-Slavery meetings, 5 ; closed the 
doors of meeting-houses against them,' etc., and was not 
this the fact? Perhaps he will say they were never 
opened ; but such was not the case, for they were ever 
open by common consent to Anti-Slavery societies, until 
a few years back, as a history of facts will abundantly 
testify. I know that the Advice in 1S41 says, it was con- 
trary to the general usage of Society, for meeting-houses 
to be opened to Anti-Slavery meetings, but it is so far 
from the truth, that it is a matter w T ell known, that from the 
time the testimony was taken up, down to that at which 
manumission societies prevailed in North Carolina and 
Tennessee, Friends' meeting-houses were always open, 
and in those States just referred to, in particular; for 
whenever a society wished to hold a meeting in the 
neighborhood of Friends, it was just appointed at their 
meeting-house without the least consultation, and even a 
meeting for Ministers and Elders has been known to 
evacuate the house in order to accommodate an Anti- 
Slavery meeting. At Richmond also, in this State, the 
same kind of meetings were held in their meeting-house, 
and never ivas there any other usage in the Society since 
the testimony was taken up against Slavery, till the Col- 
onization scheme spread its pestiferous influence among 
Friends, and dried up to a lamentable extent the fountain 
of brotherly love. 

"As we have, at different times, shown that the Yearly 
Meeting, in closing meeting-houses against the Abolition- 
ists, violated its own former advice to cast no discour- 
agements in the way of those who are faithfully laboring 
to promote universal emancipation ; our author, no doubt, 
aware that it was impossible to refute this charge, resorts 
to the ridiculous subterfuge of endeavoring to make us 
accountable for the evil effect of their misconduct, 
merely because we have taken the liberty to express 
publicly our disapprobation of such proceedings, and 
thus furnishing those advocates out of the pale of our 



266 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION m 

religious society with the encouragement, that all of 
the Society were not disposed to treat them in such a 
manner. 

u In one of these efforts he observes: 'If any of its 
members were so regardless of the Advices of the body, 
as to engage in endeavoring to throw discouragements 
in the way of such, out of the pale of our religious society, 
as were honestly laboring on gospel principles for the 
abolition of Slavery, by telling them and the slavehold- 
ers, that the Society of Friends, who had heretofore been 
distinguished for their zeal in promoting the cause of 
the abolition of Slavery, were now throwing their weight 
and influence in the Pro-Slavery scale, and were now 
actively engaged in endeavoring to put down the cause 
of emancipation, would such be suitable to fill important 
stations in Society? Would not such as had distinguished 
themselves by the publication of such libels against the 
Society, be manifestly unsuitable for important services 
in it? I think they would.' 

u Here he has charged those Friends removed from the 
Meeting for Sufferings, as well as others, with promoting 
the publication of a libel against their society, and has 
averred that 'such were excluded' from important ser- 
vices in Society, on that account. 

"Now, mark his declaration on page 6, the tenor of 
which means, if it means anything at all, that their re- 
moval was not intended to imply that they were guilty 
of any violation of discipline or immoral conduct what- 
ever. Thus we hear him avowing that they were re- 
moved from that important station in Society, and pro- 
nounced disqualified for further services in it hecause they 
promoted the publication of a libel against the Society; 
and then, again, in another place he, in effect, declares, 
equally positive, that they were not removed on account 
of any violation of discipline or immoral conduct what- 
ever. The publication of a libel, it would seem then, is 
no violation of discipline or immoral conduct with him. 
Really ! is this an exponent of our author's system of 
ethics ? We might readily suppose so from the liberal- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 267 

ity with which he indulges in such publications, as I trust 
I shall demonstrate before I am done. But he will, per- 
haps, not like to admit that such conduct is not contrary 
to discipline or immoral. I shall, however, leave him to 
lay hold of whichever horn of the dilemma he may 
choose, either to admit this, or that he has pointedly con- 
tradicted himself in the two statements, and, therefore, 
that one of them, at least, is a falsehood. 

Again he says: fc Now if this advice (against opening 
meeting-houses), as you say, has a tendency to weaken 
the cause of emancipation and strengthen the bonds of 
Slavery, why did you ever publish it? 5 And in another 
place : ' Now 1 cannot see how you could have separated 
on this account, for if it is objectionable at all, you made 
it worse. 5 

" It will be seen from this and his quotation from the 
Minutes of the Yearly Meeting, that he has virtually 
taken the position, that if the Society of Friends had 
ever become so corrupt as to alter their Discipline, so as 
to allow members to hold slaves, and we should make 
known the fact, we should be chargeable with violating 
the advice to cast no discouragements in the way of the 
advocates of suffering and degraded humanity. Now, 
he gives us to understand that he approves of the gen- 
eral course of the editor of the Cincinnati ; Herald. 5 
That course he, and every one acquainted with the paper, 
knows, is, to expose the deteriorations and corruptions 
of the Whig and Democratic parties in regard to human 
rights, when, according to his doctrine, if the course of 
these parties 6 is objectionable at all, 5 the editor is mak- 
ing the matter worse; he is casting discouragements in 
the way of Liberty men ; he is weakening them and 
strengthening the slaveholder, by telling him these great 
parties are in his favor, and much more so than in for- 
mer time. Thus, if we are to believe in his logic, we 
must suppose he approves of strengthening the slave- 
holder. These arguments show to what extremities our 
opposers are driven. It appears that our author would 
have us understand that the way to uproot evil is to say 



268 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

nothing at all about it. But the Divine command is, 
' Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, 
show unto the people their trangressions, and to the house 
of Israel their sins.' Such doctrine as his, suits those 
who 'love darkness rather than light,' and for the very 
good reason that ' their deeds are evil,' and they do not 
wish them exposed.* 

"Again he says: c Now I cannot see how you could 
have separated on this account (the issuing of the Advice 
against opening meeting-houses), for if it was objection- 
able at all, you made it worse — if the advocates of eman- 
cipation out of the pale of our religious society, would 
be weakened by it, you alone published it to them — if 
the slaveholder would be strengthened by it, you gave 
him that strength, we did not ; for whenever we appear 
before him, we appear on the side of the cause of Aboli- 
tion. 'Not modern Abolition, however, it should be 
remembered;' for some of them, eager to let all know 
whether slaveholders or not, who felt interested about 
it, introduced the Advice, bearing against Anti-Slavery 
societies, into one or more anti-abolition papers of Cin- 
cinnati, which circulated in the South, from which it 
was, no doubt, copied into Southern papers, and Indiana 
Yearly Meeting highly eulogized for its course by the 
slaveholders. There is very little probability of its 
having been taken from the 'Advocate,' because but 



* I would here revert to an expression passed over in its proper place. 
Although in the instance alluded to, as in most other cases, he makes 
the charge in an indirect and underhanded manner, yet it is no less a 
charge on that account. In this way he avers we have been engaged in 
endeavoring to cast discouragements in the way of the Abolitionists, 
out of the pale of our religious society, by telling them and the slave- 
holders, etc. 

Now I am confident that he and every one of his party, must know 
there is not one particle of truth in this statement. If we should ad- 
mit that publishing the treatment toward them as wrong, would have 
a tendency to discourage them (which is perfectly absurd), what evi- 
dence is there that we, in doing it, were endeavoring to discourage 
them. We endeavoring to discourage those with whom we have united, 
and spent our time and substance for years in the promotion of a cause 
alike dear to us and them ! ! 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 269 

very few, if any, slaveholders will read it, it is so com- 
pletely anti -Quaker. But he knows very well that we 
never published it for the sake of telling the slaveholder 
they were on his side, nor to discourage the friends of 
the cause out of the pale of Society, notwithstanding his 
assertion, that ; discouraging as you say it was to them, 
it appears that it was not as much so as you wished it to 
be. 5 It is not making known the existing opposition to 
a good cause which constitutes a discouragement to those 
who wish to advance that cause, but the opposition itself; 
for to those who really desire its progress, it is a source 
of discouragement to have matters kept dark, as our 
author wishes to have them. They are glad to know 
the whole amount of opposition against which they 
have to contend, that they may direct their operations 
to suit it. 

" But a word or two more in regard to the assertion, 
that they did not publish their proceedings against the 
modern Abolitionists, to advocates of the cause out of the 
pale of Society, or to the slaveholders. They have 
printed them annually in five thousand copies of their 
Minutes, and thrown them, as it were, broadcast over 
the State of Ohio and Indiana, wherever there were any 
Friends, and in various instances, much farther ; and 
every person had, and now has, the privilege of reading 
that can get hold of them. No obligation has ever been 
imposed upon members to restrict the reading of those 
documents to themselves. They stand upon precisely the 
same ground that all other approved writings do, which 
are in common circulation, and yet, he declares, they 
were not published at all. I would ask him to answer 
seriously ; did the Yearly Meeting intend that those ad- 
vocates out of the pale of Society, who constitute in part, 
the Anti-Slavery meetings spoken of in the Advice, and 
to which the Yearly Meeting refused the use of the 
meeting-houses, should never know that they were thus 
refused the use of meeting-houses ? It is indeed, aston- 
ishing to me, that any person c heretofore believed to be 
of a sound and discerning mind,' should become so com- 

11* 



270 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

pletely blinded or infatuated, as to make such assertions. 
Was it not telling those advocates of it in the most for- 
cible manner, and in a way not easily to be forgotten, 
when a large concourse of them met at Spiceland, in the 
fall of 1841, just after the issuing of the Advice, with 
the expectation of holding the anniversary of the State 
Society, in the meeting-house, and found it closed against 
them contrary to previous usage, and were thus forced to 
retire to the woods and organize the meeting standing, 
or perchance, sitting upon some old rotten logs, while 
the bleak winds set them to shivering like the houseless 
outcast whose grievances they had met to redress ? Was 
it not telling the world of their course toward us, to pub- 
lish it as some of them did, in the 'Philadelphia Friend,' 
a paper taken by every person who chooses so to do? 
At the time of Yearly Meeting, in 1840, a request was 
made on behalf of Thomas Robson, in the Meeting for 
Sufferings, for a copy of the Epistle of Sixth month, 
1840, issued by that meeting and approved by the Yearly 
Meeting; the reason being given, that Thomas was going 
to travel in the South, and wished to carry a copy with 
him, and particularly, as he expected to call on Henry 
Clay, and the Clerk was directed to furnish him with 
one. How does this, together with other circumstances 
to which I have adverted, comport with his assertion, 
that they do not tell the slaveholders of it ! I say, it is 
completely out of his power to cite to one instance in 
which we have manifested such a desire or even any de- 
sire at all, to tell the slaveholders more than others of 
their proceedings. The principal difference, however, be- 
tween us in this particular, is, that we publish their pro- 
ceedings as wrong, and they publish them as right. 

" ; If,' says he, c the advocates of emancipation out of 
the pale of our religious Society would be weakened by 
it, you alone published it to them ; if the slaveholder 
would be strengthened by it, you gave him that strength,' 
we did not, for whenever we appear before him, we ap- 
pear on the side of the cause of Abolition. 

" I have no doubt he has here spoken the truth in re- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 271 

gard to one point, unintentionally. He tells us that they 
do not publish that advice to the slaveholder, for whenever 
they appear before him, they appear on the side of the cause 
of Abolition, and, of coarse, the idea is, publishing it 5 
would not be on that side, even if they did it themselves. 

" This is exactly owning the truth of our position, that 
just so far as they make known to the slaveholders their 
treatment of Abolitionists, they give him their strength, 
their weight and influence, unless they should appear 
before him in order to condemn their conduct, as we 
have done, so far as we have appeared before him at all, 
in which case, they, like us, would be far from giving 
him any strength by publishing it. But I have already 
shown that they have willingly made known to the 
slaveholder their conduct toward Abolitionists, and that 
officially, and for the purpose of showing their opposi- 
tion to modern Abolition, and therefore, according to our 
author's own admission, they have been strengthening 
his hands, which he calls a libel when we utter it. 

"It will be observed, that in denying that the Yearly 
Meeting directed its meeting-houses closed against the 
advocates of emancipation, and saying that had it done 
so, it must have directed them closed against all its con- 
sistent members, the idea is clearly conveyed also, that 
it did not advise against opening them to advocates of 
emancipation, but against opening them for Anti-Slavery 
meetings. Thus we hear him virtually denying that 
those who constitute Anti-Slavery ''meetings, are advocates 
of emancipation. Whose is the ; beloved theory,' that 
'the cause of emancipation, means themselves? Let 
the intelligent and impartial decide. 

4i On page 10, after charging us without producing the 
slightest evidence of its truth, with claiming that the 
cause of emancipation means ourselves and our measures 
only, he remarks : ' It reminds me of the grounds taken 
by the Church of Rome against all other religious so- 
cieties, in arrogating to itself the title of the Catholic 
Church, and holding that all others are spurious.' In 
this, as in other accusations, he has charged us without 



272 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

proof, with that which he is by his own words positively 
guilty of himself. He gives us to understand on page 3, 
that he considers the Society of Friends as the peculiar 
or chosen people of God ; so much so, that he compares 
them (by referring to what he says, was formerly Charles 
Osborne's declaration) to the chosen people of Israel, for- 
merly, and all other people, whether of ; religious socie- 
ties ' or not, to those heathen and idolatrous nations with 
which it was said that people were not to be reckoned. 
Further comment is unnecessary. But why did he not, 
in referring to Charles Osborne's former sentiments on 
this point, state also, that at the same time he was equally 
earnest in the love and fervency of the Gospel, to warn 
Friends to cast no discouragements in the way of the 
advocates out of the pale of Society — and that he was 
opposed to closing meeting-houses against them. 

" After noticing two circumstances to which we re- 
ferred, he, in his peculiar way of reasoning, comes to the 
conclusion, ' I must therefore seek for other reasons than 
these, for your separation.' He does not once think of 
showing the people that what were set forth as facts by 
us, were false statements — those facts which we gave as 
evidence of the departure of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
from the true principles of the Society. The exercise of 
a tender conscience, for which our worthy predecessors 
suffered so extremely, and from which we were pro- 
hibited in the Society, as set forth in the Declaration, is 
such a trivial matter, that it is unworthy of notice, in 
taking a view of our alleged causes. But to proceed, he 
says: 'Even admitting your beloved theory, that the 
Anti-Slavery cause means yourselves and your measures 
only, is it a greater one than the salvation of the im- 
mortal soul?' And again, on page 10, he says: 'You 
are continually holding forth to one another and the 
world, that the Anti-Slavery cause, or cause of emanci- 
pation, means yourselves and your measures only.' It is 
a little remarkable, that a person professing to desire our 
return into fellowship with himself, should utter such a 
wanton insult. Would we not have a brotherly time in 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 273 

such a fraternity ? Who of us ever exhibited such a 
1 theory? Who ever made such a claim? There are 
various measures resorted to in the different parts of the 
country, to arouse the people to the subject, that we do 
not make use of; and again, we make use of some mea- 
sures that others do not ; for we generally vote against 
Slavery, while some others do not vote at all ; and where 
or when have we held forth to one another, that these do 
not support the Anti-Slavery cause at all — that we do 
all the business? I defy him to point out one single in- 
stance. It is the undeviating course of the 4 Advocate,' 
to recognize all kinds of Abolitionists ; its columns are 
open to them all, to advocate the cause in the way they 
may think right, within the bounds of Christian moral- 
ity. But it seems, because we have undertaken to repel 
some of the slanderous imputations preferred against the 
Abolitionists in general, as well as ourselves, and to vin- 
dicate our course in the face of the world, we are to be 
loaded with this calumny also. In an attempt to cast 
dust in the eyes of the people in regard to the true cause 
of their opposition, by feigning that it is on account of a 
fear of compromising principles, by opening meeting- 
houses, he institutes the following inquiry : ' Now, if a 
portion of your members were in the practice of opening 
your meeting-houses for the purpose of holding meetings, 
to pray by appointment for the salvation of the immortal 
soul, and to deliver sermons, having for their object the 
same most righteous cause, would you not discourage the 
practice, as being contrary to the general usage of Society, 
and of hurtful tendency to your members V 

u His argument here, being based upon that which is 
not the point at issue, is but labor lost. The advice was 
not against opening meeting-houses to those who prac- 
ticed that which is contrary to our principles, but against 
opening them to Anti-Slavery meetings^ without making 
any distinction in regard to their practice — against open- 
ing them to those whom the Yearly Meeting before pro- 
nounced Christian philanthropists, laboring upon the 
same ground which it had long occupied. 



274 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 

" It will be observed, that he insinuates on page 3, that 
we were in the practice of supporting a hireling minis- 
try, or that which is equivalent to it, by going contrary 
to their advice. Now, if this was the case, why were w r e 
not dealt with for a disregard of our testimony on this 
subject. It is evident, he does not believe it himself, not- 
withstanding such insinuation or otherwise, that it was 
not the intention of the Meeting for Sufferings, in report- 
ing those eight members of that body, as disqualified, to 
do it for what they were guilty of; for he observes on 
page 6, c but did that charge them with any violation of 
our discipline, or immoral conduct? We know it did 
not, nor was it so intended.' And he well knew that 
some of those were the most active in paying the expense 
of Anti-Slavery lectures, which is undoubtedly the sub- 
ject to which he alludes. But why should he pretend 
that to ' hire,' (to use his own expression,) an Anti- 
Slavery lecturer, is supporting a hireling ministry ! He 
w T ould feel no scruple in hiring a man to plead his cause 
before a court, were he like to be defrauded out of a 
large amount of property, in order to maintain his 
rights ; or, if he had been defrauded, to reinstate him in 
his rights. The slaves have been defrauded, not merely 
of all the property they would have accumulated their 
whole life long, but of themselves also — of the dearest of 
all rights — personal freedom ; and is it not right for 
colored people to make use of the same privilege he 
does — to hire some one, or more, to plead their cause ; 
and if so, have not the Friends a right also to assist 
them, especially when they have been defrauded to such 
an extent as to have nothing to hire with ? Their cause 
can be pleaded effectually, only before the court of the 
people, and whenever the people shall give judgment in 
their favor, their rights will be restored. But let us ex- 
amine his position a little further. He would have us 
understand, that he is in favor of supporting such papers 
as the c Cincinnati Herald.' He has no objection to pay- 
ing a man to lecture the people with his pen, one who 
makes a living by that almost exclusively; but if the 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 275 

saine person should undertake to talk to the people, 
instead of write, as he sometimes does, why then it 
would not do at all to pay him anything for what he 
could do; it would be supporting a hireling ministry. 
He would close the meeting-houses against him, and if 
we should denominate him an eminent philanthropist, 
pleading the cause of millions of our suffering brethren 
and sisters in bonds, who are not permitted to plead for 
themselves, we should hear him exclaiming with the 
writer of the anonymous ' Review,' ■ a great flourish 
this, when the words, an abolition lecturer, would have 
expressed the whole affair.' 

" Again, says he ; ' You have been endeavoring to 
show that Indiana Yearly Meeting is actively engaged in 
endeavoring to suppress the abolition of Slavery.' 

" Np# I would ask why he did not represent the case 
as it was, namely; that we gave facts, showing their op- 
position to ' modern Abolition societies,' as they term 
them in contempt — the opposition of some of their lead- 
ers, at least, to immediate emancipation, and their par- 
tiality to the Colonization scheme, granting always, how- 
ever, that the greater amount of opposition was based upon 
a desire to retain a place and influence with the rulers of 
the land, which they could not do without disclaiming 
the hated Abolitionists. This is just what we have done 
in regard to this matter ; and who, of common sober 
sense, does not know that people may hold these senti- 
ments, and thus be desirous of popular favor, without 
being actively engaged in endeavoring to suppress the 
abolition erf Slavery, which is a charge we have never 
made against the Yearly Meeting. 

M On pages 3 and 4, he treats upon the subject of our 
having published our grievances — the proscriptive mea- 
sures of the Yearly Meeting, whereby we were deprived 
of the privilege of Society, except at the expense of our 
conscientious principles. It will be seen, he pretends 
not to understand the object in thus making it known ; 
4 whether,' says he, ' it was to weaken the hands of those 
out the pale of our religious society, who are honestly 



276 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

laboring to promote the cause of emancipation, and to 
strengthen the hands of the slaveholder, 1 shall not pre- 
tend to decide.' As it is evident that he is acquainted 
with our documents, can any one believe there is a par- 
ticle of candor in such remarks ? 

u After quoting the proscriptive Advice referred to, he 
says : fc Now is this the first time you ever knew Friends 
to advise to be weighty and deliberate in making appoint- 
ments to important services in Society? Why is it objec- 
tionable now, and never before?' 1 answer, this is not 
what was objected to at all, as he and every one knows 
who has read our Declaration. Why this continued 
effort to mislead the reader ? The objection was, that 
the Yearly Meeting gave as a reason for urging this 
course, that those who had ' distinguished themselves by 
opposition or disregard to the Advices and travail of the 
body, are manifestly unsuitable for important services in 
it, w T hile they remain in that situation ;' and then ap- 
pointed open violators of such Advices, who were opposed 
to modern Abolitionism. If the rule had been applied 
to all impartially, who were opposed to the Advices of 
the Yearly Meeting, and not to those who were opposed 
to one kind of Advices, the subject, of course, would not 
have been named in the way it was. It is a very conve- 
nient way to be weighty and deliberate in making 
appointments, to make violation of the Yearly Meeting's 
Advice a test question whereby to ascertain the fitness of 
persons for services in Society, and then, knowing them- 
selves to be guilty of such violations, c deliberately 5 ex- 
empt themselves from the operation of the rule and be 
4 weighty' in applying it to others. Every one acquainted 
with the proceedings of the ruling party, knows that 
Abolitionists were the only violators of Advice, to which 
this rule was applied ; but our author never once thinks 
of explaining why this was the case. It would seem, it 
never entered his mind, that it was the injustice of such 
proceedings, the prohibition of liberty of conscience, and 
the opposition to modern Abolition, which it evinced, 
that occasioned our remarks, notwithstanding this object 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FJRIENDS. 277 

is so clearly set forth in the Declaration. And now, in 
turn, let nie query ; has it ever before been the practice 
of the Yearly Meeting to tell a portion of its members, 
that another portion of their fellow-members, holding 
conscientiously different sentiments in regard to Christian 
duty, are unworthy of their fellowship — aliens to the 
commonwealth of Israel — and should be treated as such ? 
Is this the way to keep the ' unity of the spirit in the bond 
of peace?' And let me ask again, whether such is not 
an open violation of the * plain letter of Discipline, 5 con- 
tained in the following sentence : ; Liberty of conscience 
being the common right of all men, and particularly 
essential to the well-being of religious societies^ we hold 
it to be indispensably incumbent upon us to maintain it 
INVIOLABLY AMONG OURSELVES.' Had this 
clause of Discipline been carried out by the ruling party, 
there would not have been any division at all in the 
Society. This must be obvious to all, nowithstanding 
his insinuation to the contrary, on page 3, for we never 
tried to urge them into our measures ; we merely wished 
to have liberty to perform what we believed to be our 
duty. But it seems, we are now to be treated with con- 
temptuous ridicule for making known our grievances, as 
though it was a mere desire for preferment that induced a 
separation. Just think of it for a moment ; Charles Os- 
borne, Daniel Fuckett, Martha Wooton, George Shugart, 
and various others whom they charge with being at the 
head of the secession, separate for the sake of appoint- 
ments ! Now, even if they had desired such preferments, 
they were already occupying the most important stations 
in Society, and could have continued to occupy them un- 
molested if they had been willing so far to have violated 
their consciences, as to submit to the requisitions of the 
body. Is it not the strongest evidence of the purity of 
their motives, that they should be willing to sacrifice 
everything like society preferment in order to maintain a 
conscience ' void of offense' before God ? And is it not 
conclusive evidence of the love of that party for the 
honor that cometh from man — those society preferments 

13 



278 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

of which he speaks, that they should suppose we could 
be induced to violate our conscientious views in regard 
to supporting modern Abolition societies, if we should 
find that they were determined to deprive us of them if 
we did not? 

"They have presented this inducement in various 
forms. Sometimes by appointing to some station those 
who were tinctured with Abolition, thus placing them 
under an obligation for such a favor, to be like they were 
themselves. And they have actually succeeded in some 
instances in drawing Friends from the support of the A. S. 
cause by promptly seizing the opportunity, where a want of 
firmness was discovered to make its appearance in regard 
to their principles, to appoint them immediately on some 
business, even while they were still in open violation of 
the advice not to associate with others, and thus distin- 
guishing themselves by opposition and disregard to the 
advice of the body not to appoint such, were, therefore, 
by their own showing manifestly unsuitable for the 
stations they were occupying. 

" Now, if prohibiting liberty of conscience is not a just 
cause of secession, to exhibit which every one knows wrs 
the object in referring to the proscriptive advice, I should 
like to know what would constitute a just cause ? Does 
he believe there ever was or can be such a cause ? We 
might suppose from his doctrine of unconditional submis- 
sion to the body, that he does not ; and hence he should 
return to the 'body, 5 the good old mother church, the 
Church of Rome, from which all other churches seceded, 
or in opposition to which they were established. 

" The very existence of the Society of Friends, accord- 
ing to his view, is wrong. They should all return to 
that body and submit to its requirements — cast the 
responsibility upon it, they would be clear! This is 
what he tells us in regard to submission to the require- 
ments of his Yearly Meeting. 

" In regard to what he says he is informed took place 
at one of our caucus meetings at Newport, the object of 
-which, he says, appeared to be to endeavor to devise 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 279 

means to secure our standing in Society, is about like his 
other statements. There was no meeting held for such a 
purpose at all. But we have proof at hand that some of 
his party held a caucus before Yearly Meeting, and there 
planned out the proscriptive course to pursue toward us, 
which we heard of some time before Yearly Meeting, 
and Thomas Arnett proposed it in the meeting, accord- 
ingly, as though it was from immediate inspiration. So 
that it is evident that their fc desire' to put down the Abo- 
litionists was so great that l they would even hold a 
meeting to endeavor to devise means to secure 5 that 
object. 

fck Commencing at the bottom of page 4, he remarks, 
'another cause given by you for your se aration, and so 
published to the world, is the removal of some members 
from the Meeting for Sufferings without giving the 
causes. This w r as not unprecedented in our Yearly 
Meeting, your assertions to the contrary, notwith- 
standing.' 

" The obvious design, here, is to create the impression 
that he had detected an error in the statement of A. S. 
Friends. But our statement was substantially this (See 
both sides of the question, page 18): 

kt c We believe no instance is on record in the Minutes 
of the Yearly Meeting, so far as we have examined 
(which is as far back as 1827), of the removal of any 
members from the Meeting for Sufferings (until disowned 
from Society), on any other account than request to be 
released, or delinquency. And, if we are not mistaken, 
in all such cases the reason is given. 5 This, it will be 
seen, he contradicts, and in the next breath relates an 
account of a removal in 1828 for DELINQUENCY, thus 
at once confirming our statement. If it was not the de- 
linquency recognized in Discipline for which they were 
removed, we cannot help that, our statement is still cor- 
rect. But if the representation is true, that the Meeting 
for Sufferings did, at that time, report any of its members 
as delinquents, appointed either by the Yearly Meeting 
or Quarters, who w r ere diligent attenders of its meetings, 



280 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

and chargeable with no violation of Discipline or immo- 
ral conduct whatever, it only shows that it transcended 
its bounds. 

" But the main point in our statement in regard to this 
matter was, that 'the only instance on record of a mem- 
ber being stated to be disqualified and no cause of dis- 
qualification mentioned, is that of an individual who was 
disowned and had appealed to the Yearly Meeting, and 
that meeting had confirmed the judgments of the Quar- 
terly and Monthly meetings, 5 thus making it unnecessary 
to state it any farther than what was already on Minute. 
Now as those removed in 1842 were declared to be dis- 
qualified, and no cause given, contrary to previous pro- 
ceedings above referred to, it is indeed strarge that any 
person professing candor, with these facts before him, 
and knowing that this was the main point at issue, as he 
surely must, should gravely declare that he ; thought he 
bad abundantly shown that the act of removal, in 1842, 
was fully sustained by previous proceedings of the Yearly 
Meeting,' without even attempting to deny cur state- 
ment in this particular, or reconcile their proceedings 
with those of former times. And it is equally astonish- 
ing that he should make such declaration, knowing, as 
he surely must, that if those removed in 1828, to which 
he refers, had been declared disqualified, there would 
still have been a vast difference in the two cases. They 
did not request the meeting to state the cause of disquali- 
fication on Minute, that wherever it appeared the cause 
might also appear, as those did in 1842. 

" It is evident that a person conscious of having vio- 
lated the Discipline, or of having committed an immoral 
act, would be willing to lie under such a vague charge as 
this. The more atrocious the act, the more willing or 
desirous would he be to have it so : while, at the same 
time, a person not thus conscious would not be willing 
to submit to it at all. It is, therefore, most certainly 
conclusive proof that those who have made the request 
felt conscious of their innocence; and the refusal to grant 
it shows clearly also that the meeting was conscious that 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 281 

its grounds for such proceedings would not bear the test 
of investigation, or they would have complied with the 
request. It is indeed profoundly absurd to suppose, as 
he remarks, that fc if those Friends who were released 
had been guilty of a violation of Discipline, and had on 
that account been reported as disqualified, and the meet- 
ing had named and recorded the violation, they would 
have had just cause of complaint against the procedure;' 
against the meeting for granting their most earnest 
request! If they had been guilty, and had not made 
such request, they might have had cause of complaint, if 
it had been given and recorded, but not otherwise. 

" But he has, with his peculiar genius, artfully endea- 
vored to represent the existence of the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings as based upon the same ground as that of the 
committees having the care of the African or Indian con- 
cerns. But it will be recollected there is no Discipline 
in regard to these committees at all. The Yearly Meet- 
ing has made no laws by which to be governed in regard 
to these ; it may change such committees every year if 
it should see proper. 

"The cases, therefore, are not at all parallel. But if 
the meeting did, in 1828, represent any of the members 
of those committees as having disqualified themselves, 
and removed them accordinglj 7 , who were ; good and 
worthy members, and had been guilty of no violation of 
Discipline or immoral conduct whatever,' it was not 
only a contradiction in itself, but very wrong indeed; 
and I hope if there are any among us who had a hand 
in the transaction, that they will be very far from justi- 
fying it. 

u I do not recollect of ever reading the production of an 
author that embraced so much insidious, circumven- 
tive, underhanded maneuverings as are contained in the 
one before me. With this kind of artifice he has en- 
deavored to identity the case of those removed in 1842, 
with that of " good and worthy members, " who had not 
been put upon certain appointments because it was sup- 
posed they had not attained to that perfection of qualifi- 



282 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

cation which others had, or which in case of recommen- 
ding Ministers and appointing Elders, it was necessary 
they should. 

"Now it was a perfect understanding at the time, a- 
mong all parties, by their being reported as they were, 
that they had disqualified themselves by what was con- 
sidered their bad conduct, for further service in that 
body. Will he or any person in his party deny it? I 
know they cannot do it in truth ; and yet by his sly in- 
sinuations, he would make his readers believe they were 
really charged with nothing at all, and that their being 
thus declared disqualified, was just an ordinary circum- 
stance, of not appointing, where it was believed a quali- 
fication for the service proposed to be performed, had not 
been attained ! 

"Are we to understand they were esteemed as good and 
worthy members by the ruling party, when it was ob- 
vious to all present in the meeting, that that party were 
determined to pay no attention to what they had to say ? 
Even one of the most pathetic appeals for justice — a re- 
quest that they should state on Minute the cause of their 
disqualification, that wherever it appeared the cause 
might also appear, was rejected in the same way. Such 
a pretense, is nothing short of an insult to the common 
sense of those who were present. And supposing they 
were such as he pretends they were esteemed, I ask, if it 
does not prove our assertion correct, that the measures 
of his party were unchristian measures? Where is the 
person who is disposed to do right, who would think of 
treating good and worthy members in such a manner ? 

"Page 5, fc You particularly complain of no reason be- 
ing given for the removal of the members of the Meeting 
for Sufferings in 1842, which, it seems to me, you must 
see upon the least impartial reflection, would have been 
very improper and directly opposed to good order. I 
think the Yearly Meeting has never given a reason for a 
removal from an appointment in any case (and such re- 
movals have been frequent) except in cases of death, dis- 
ownment, removal or request. To do so, would, in my 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 283 

opinion, be a direct violation of that clause of Discipline 
which says,' etc. Then follows an extract from the Dis- 
cipline, regulating the introduction of complaints into 
meetings of business. There is something a little re- 
markable in this. ; It would be,' he says, • directly op- 
posed to good order, to give reasons for removing mem- 
bers from the Meeting for Sufferings, except in cases of 
death, disownment, removal or request.' What then, is 
there not excepted in which it is opposed to good order 
to report them. It is evident from his quotation of the 
paragraph of Discipline, and his remarks thereon, that 
he alludes to cases of individuals who conduct them- 
selves so as to require the action of a meeting for dis- 
cipline. The cause then why the reason was not given, 
was, that it would be introducing that into the ; Yearly 
Meeting' which belongs to a Preparative meeting, a 
charge of violation of Discipline, or immoral conduct. 
Now put this by the side of what he says on Page 6th, 
'but did that [reporting them as disqualified] charge them 
with any violation of Discipline or immoral conduct? we 
know it did not nor was it so intended.' Now I ask at 
which time did he tell the truth I 

'"On page 6, he again repeats the astonishing absurdi- 
ty, that they did not publish their proceedings against us. 
In additon to my former remarks, I would observe, 
that although he declares that we alone have published 
the treatment toward those removed from the Meeting 
for Sufferings in 1842, yet they have printed nearly or 
quite 5000 copies of it in the Minutes, and 5000 copies 
of a justification of it, in an Address, making nearly 8000 
copies more than we have. And I have no doubt they 
have circulated it four times as much in the United 
States as we have. And even in England their Address 
justifying it, was published in the British Friend and was 
desired so to be by leading members in his Yearly Meet- 
ing, and yet with much seeming candor, he avers that 
they have not published it at all. And what reason does 
he give for making such assertion ? Because, says he, 
■ those documents were for our members alone.' 



284 . HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION W 

" Now I suppose, any person not a member of Society 
would have as good a right to read one of these, as the 
Advocate if he could get hold of it, and I think neither 
our author or any of his friends would hesitate to lend 
them to their neighbors, unless it should happen to strike 
their minds, that by so doing they would not appear be- 
fore them on the side of the cause of Abolition. There- 
fore, according to his • beloved theory,' if we had so 
worded our documents as to address them to Anti-Slavery 
Friends alone, no matter how far they might circulate, 
we should not have published the account at all. 

"Page 7, he makes the following quotation from Disci- 
pline. ' Any (members) declining or greatly neglecting 
their attendance, the Meeting for Sufferings are to no- 
tify said meeting or meetings (the meetings by which 
they had been appointed) of such delinquency, in order 
that the places of those may be supplied by new ap- 
pointments.' This, he remarks, c is the plain letter of Disci- 
pline for notifying the Yearly or Quarterly meeting, as 
the case may be, of delinquency in the attendance of 
meetings, but for no other delinquency ; yet are we on 
that account to suppose that any other proceedings, 
though in no way violating this or any other clause, is 
not only unauthorized, but contrary to the plain letter 
of Discipline ? certainly not.' Here it will be observ- 
ed that he undertakes to prove, that it is not contrary 
to the plain letter of Discipline to remove members of 
the Meeting for Sufferings under any pretense whatever, 
from the fact that it does not in this place prohibit it in 
direct terms. This is his meaning, as I gather from his 
illustration. Let us now turn to the Discipline. 

" After stating the object of the Meeting for Sufferings, 
how it is constituted — fixing the time for it to convene, 
&c, the first paragraph winds up by saying, and ' is to be 
subject to the following rvles? Then follow the rules, 
five, in number. The fourth one is the paragraph he has 
partly quoted. This rule, he admits, does not touch the 
question of removing from membership in that body for 
any other delinquency than that of neglect or non- 



INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 285 

attendance of its meetings. Can any person define how 
the meeting can be subject to five rules and at the same 
time institute a sixth one, embracing a matter not touch- 
ed in the five ? Cannot any person see that the lati- 
tude given by the addition of the sixth one, in the case 
now before us, would be much greater than without it, 
and would the meeting then, under such circumstances 
be subject to, or governed by, those five rules which the 
Discipline says it is to be ? Were I to adopt his reason- 
ing, 1 might with equal propriety contend that it would 
not be contrary to the plain letter of Discipline for the 
Meeting for Sufferings to add another, and a seventh rule, 
and report half of their number every five years, that new 
ones might be appointed. There is plain letter of Disci- 
pline for reporting when delinquent, ' yet are we on that 
account to suppose that the meeting has not a right ' to 
report half of their number every five years, in order 
that a change might take place ? The Discipline is as si- 
lent in this case as the other, and therefore according to 
our author's reasoning cannot be a violation of it. But 
he remarks further, - according to the grounds taken by 
you the plainest cases of disqualification, even that of 
mental derangement, could not be removed unless the 
subject greatly neglected the attendance of the meetings, 
without a violation of the plain letter of Discipline.' 

" The Discipline provides, that in order that the Yearly 
Meeting and its several branches may be properly repre- 
sented in its recess, they shall each appoint a certain 
number of Friends which shall constitute a Meeting for 
Sufferings. And I should suppose common sense would 
dictate, that an insane person could not represent them 
any more properly than a deceased person. And for 
this reason, no doubt, the Discipline is silent on the sub- 
ject. It is astonishing with what pertinacity he and his 
party adhere to a position directly opposed to that taken 
by Friends in the former secession, or at least in Phila- 
delphia Yearly Meeting, where their Discipline is substan- 
tially the same as with us in regard to this matter. We 
have taken the ground that they did. 



286 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

" The arguments of our author against our position will, 
therefore, apply with equal force against that of his own 
party in Philadelphia. [See Foster's Reports — examina- 
tion of Win. Evans and Holliday Jackson.] 

" Before leaving this subject I would state, that the 
proceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting were contrary to 
the plain letter of Discipline in another point of view, 
and which was particularly had in mind in making the 
statements in the Declaration. The Discipline recog- 
nizes the right of the Quarters to be represented in the 
Meeting for Sufferings. But that body reported a part 
of the representatives from one of the Quarters as dis- 
qualified, and sent on the account to that meeting in 
order that a new appointment might take place, and the 
Yearly Meeting sanctioned the proceedings, and then 
adopted a rule to disqualify all who should oppose the 
'travail of the body,' which, of course, included that to 
make this change. The Quarter, no doubt, wished those 
persons to represent it, but those proceedings cut it off 
completely from enjoying that privilege. If this is not 
a violation of the plain letter of Discipline I think there 
is no danger of its ever being violated. 

u Page 9, ■ But, when in relation to Anti-Slavery so- 
cieties, it was proposed that Friends should form an asso- 
ciation of their own on that subject, I did not see any 
danger or inconsistency in our doing so, but on the con- 
trary, feeling as I did and still do, much interest in the 
promotion of the cause, I thought it might advance the 
work. In this situation I remained a considerable length 
of time, being prevented from pushing forward such an 
association only through the judgment of other Friends, 
and although I believed they wished me well, I found it 
hard work to believe they wished as well to the Anti- 
Slavery cause as they ought. I thought if they did, they 
could not object to such an association as was proposed. 
Thus the accuser of the brethren was finding entrance, 
and it was not without considerable effort that I was en- 
abled so far to overcome my prejudices in favor of such 
an institution, as to give the subject an impartial exam- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 287 

ination. But when I succeeded in doing so, I thought, 
and still think, that such a course would be calculated to 
divide and scatter us, both in feeling and action, and 
thus lessen instead of increase our ability to do good for 
the advancement of the cause for which the association 
would have been intended.' 

" It will be seen that our author professes to place 
much confidence in impartial examination. Now if he 
really desires to make it, why does he not, when stating 
his belief, that forming associations among Friends, 
would be calculated to divide and scatter us, etc., tell 
us how it happens that a Bible Association of Friends 
has been existing for a number of years in the United 
States, as well as other benevolent institutions of a dif- 
ferent character, without producing the disastrous con- 
sequences he pretends to foresee. And in regard to 
dividing and scattering us in feeling and action, it could 
not possibly be worse than for some Friends to associate 
in mixed societies, while others did not, for the promo- 
tion of similar objects ; and why did he not show the 
frightful results in former times in this particular ? Why 
did he not show us that some of our most worthy 
Friends, both in England and America, produced divi- 
sions among Friends, by joining such associations? The 
reason is obvious, there were no such results. And the 
reason there were no such results is, there was little or 
no opposition to Friends being thus engaged. 

" Now it is well known that he is perfectly acquainted 
with all these facts. Would any one then, suppose 
that he really desires an impartial examination ? It 
is, surely, representing the Society in a very unfavorable 
light, to say that it would divide and scatter, for Friends 
to be allowed to form such benevolent associations as 
they might feel interested in establishing. He must 
suppose that Friends are very intolerant, indeed, or 
otherwise exceedingly jealous of what they might 'deem 
a tax upon their own just praise, 5 if he believes that tor 
one set of Friends to engage in active operations, for 
the promotion of one branch of Christian duty, while 






/ 

288 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

others did not, would set them at variance one against 
another. Does he believe there is any such thing as 
individual and special duties, or was the apostle mistaken 
when he said, there are diversities of gifts, but the same 
spirit. 

" Now if an individual — such for instance as Elizabeth 
Fry, of England — should engage more ardently in alle- 
viating the condition of the poor than others, it is to be 
presumed, according to our writer's argument, that such 
person would consider those Friends, who were not 
equally ardent in *hat cause with herself, as deficient in 
the good work she was engaged in supporting ; and, 
therefore, she should abandon it, and let the poor take 
care of themselves till Friends all got ready. No indi- 
vidual should advance beyond the mass ; for if one 
might, another might also; and they would be sure to 
associate together in some way or other for their own 
mutual help 'and encouragement, in the promotion of a 
common cause. 

u But, in regard to the ground of his opposition to 
Anti-Slavery associations of Friends, if I am to believe 
his own statement, which I heard him make just after 
he had succeeded in overcoming his ; prejudices in favor 
of such associations, 5 it was, that such societies would 
inevitably be merged into the mixed associations,' (mod- 
ern Abolition Societies), or be in some way connected 
with them, and that if we should go on in forming such 
associations, Charles Osborne would probably be with us, 
and if he should be, he would lose his influence in Soci- 
ety, and thus a great deal of harm would be done by it. 
(I give the substance). And many of us having so fre- 
quently heard him speak of losing influence, by laboring 
in An ti- Slavery associations, and of the necessity of 
abandoning them, in order to retain it, by which it was 
clearly understood that, by so doing, he and others 
would retain such favor with the body, as to receive ap- 
pointments and keep their important stations ; that his 
interrogatories, insinuating that we seceded in order to 
secure preferments in Society, come with a peculiar ill 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 289 

grace from Mm, and are truly worthy of their author. 
It is well known that he was formerly an Abolitionist ; 
for at that time he, doubtless, thought Abolitionists were 
going to be popular in Society, as Charles Osborne was 
one, and also one of the foremost Friends in the Yearly 
Meeting. It is also well known, that some of his fel- 
low-members of the 'body,' have been dissatisfied with 
his former abolition conduct, and have stated at different 
times, that he ought not to be made use of in Society, 
unless he should make an acknowledgment. He, there- 
fore, no doubt, found it more agreeable to his feelings to 
do it by publicly abusing the objects of their hatred in a 
printed document, and as it were, incidentally introduc- 
ing an admission into it, that the accuser of the brethren 
was finding entrance into his mind when he was an Abo- 
litionist, than to do it in any other way. And I have 
not a shadow of doubt that he thought it necessary in 
order to ' secure his standing in Society ;' and that it was 
done mainly for that purpose. 

"After endeavoring to show the impropriety of Friends 
forming associations of their own to promote a good ob- 
ject, he says : ' Perhaps some of you may say my rea- 
soning is not good, for the Society of Friends are not 
Anti-Slavery but Pro-Slavery. To such 1 would say, is 
it an evidence that your society is in favor of war, be- 
cause you have not formed a Friends' Peace Society?' 

" Here he tacitly admits, that if the Society were Pro- 
Slavery, his reasoning would not be good. That is, his 
reasoning would not show that in that case it would 
divide and scatter, to allow members to form Anti-Sla- 
very associations. But if they were so perfect as to be 
completely Anti-Slavery, why then it would divide and 
scatter, in feeling and action, to allow them to do so. But 
the object of these expressions, no doubt, was to insinu- 
ate that their not having formed Anti-Slavery associa- 
tions of their own, was of the character of evidence 
which we are in the habit of adducing to prove their un- 
soundness, and was intended, no doubt, to divert the mind 
of the reader from the real cause of the separation. We 



290 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

have never instanced that as a proof that they were Pro- 
Slavery. And I doubt whether ever an individual of us 
has done it. But the opposition of his party to such 
select Anti-Slavery associations was referred to, to prove 
that their objections to joining Anti-Slavery societies was 
not based upon a fear of mixing with other people, as 
they pretended. 

" Again, page 10, he says: 'Unless the character of 
that paper (the Advocate) is changed, and made what it 
professes to be, an Anti-Slavery paper instead of an 
anti-Quaker one, vain will be your attempts to give 
the subject an impartial examination, while you believe 
its version of affairs. It is true that sometimes there are 
Anti-Slavery pieces in it, but they are few and far 
between.' I should like extremely well to know what he 
calls anti-Quaker. That paper has exhibited facts, and 
I believe nothing but facts, in regard to the opposition of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting to modern Abolition, and the 
corrupt conduct and practice of some of its leading mem- 
bers. And the editor has repeatedly, of late, offered the 
use of the columns of his paper to those who may think 
themselves or others misrepresented, to make such cor- 
rections as they might think proper. Or, if they would 
furnish satisfactory evidence that any statement in the 
'Advocate' was incorrect, he would take a pleasure in 
correcting it. And our author has been a reader of the 
paper, and a familiar one, too, if we are to suppose he 
knew* what he was saying when he described its char- 
acter. Why, then, has it so happened that neither he 
nor any other person among them, has ever attempted 
to correct ' its version of affairs,' knowing that they had 
the opportunity ? I think there can be but one valid 
reason given, and that is, they knew that nothing but 
facts were stated, notwithstanding his insinuation to the 
contrary. 

"It would appear then, that Quakerism, in his view, 
means, that which the editor has exposed in the conduct 
of leading members of Indiana Yearly Meeting, which 
they do not attempt to contradict. Such, for instance, 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 291 

as that of Thomas Arnett uttering a falsehood, which 
was proved upon him by some four or five witnesses, 
and he was acquitted by the adherents of the < body, 5 
and that of another prominent member who declared, in 
a Preparative meeting, that Abolitionists were guilty of 
conveying away fugitive slaves to a land of freedom, 
which was, in fact, stealing and secreting other men's 
property. Such sentiments and doings as these are op- 
posed in Quakers as well as in others, by the paper, and 
if this opposition makes it ANTI-QUAKER, what, I 
would ask, could possibly make it a Quaker paper but 
taking the opposite side, and advocating what it now ex- 
poses and condemns ? If this is Quakerism, it seems to 
me the less there is in the world the better. But I chal- 
lenge him or any of his party to prove out the first arti- 
cle written by the editor of any Anti-Slavery Friend in 
that paper which controverts one single principle or tes- 
timony professed by the Society of Friends. 

" Will he say that exposing the corruptions of the Soci- 
ety is what he is alluding to as constituting the charac- 
ter he is pleased to affix to the paper? Then I would 
reply, that his own favorite one, the 'Cincinnati Herald, 5 
is an Anti-Republican paper, because it exposes the cor- 
ruptions of this professed Republican Government. And 
it is also in the same way an anti -Quaker paper. Some 
of the severest articles ever published against the posi- 
tion taken by Friends, have been published in that pa- 
per, and I believe, were written by the editor himself. 
His remarks concerning the last address of Indiana 
Yearly Meeting, show that he esteems those constituting 
that body, just about such Abolitionists as the Whig 
Party. It is true he has of late devoted his paper more 
to the political bearings of the question than he did for- 
merly, and, therefore, does not now say so much about 
the opposition of any religious society as he did. 

u It may be proper here to state that we were driven 
to the necessity of seceding in order to enjoy liberty of 
conscience, the Yearly Meeting prohibiting us from sup- 
porting the present Anti-Slavery enterprise as we be- 






292 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

lieved it our duty to do. Those acquainted with the ori- 
gin and process of those difficulties know perfectly well 
that the onset was first made upon us, that we were rep- 
resented as working in our own will and strength, run- 
ning before our guide, etc. Now, as the cause of the 
slave was near to our hearts, some of us felt it right to 
endeavor to refute those charges, and set the matter 
right, but for so doing we were censured and charged as 
disturbers of Society, I mean by individuals. Advices 
became more and more positive, and thus we were driven 
to the necessity of endeavoring to show the impropriety 
of such Advices. Then came the charge of insubordina- 
tion — an intention to scatter and divide Society. It was 
still deemed a duty by some to stand up in defense of 
what they believed to be right, against such encroach- 
ments, and to some extent exhibited by argument the 
cause of such proceedings, but nothing could change the 
determination of some of our opposers to prostrate the 
cause we had espoused and its advocates in Society. 
When by the measures taken against us, we were driven 
to the necessity of seceding, it became an imperative 
duty to set forth the grounds of such an important step. 
This required the development of many facts and circum- 
stances before unknown to many. For this statement we 
have been again and again falsely accused, and we have 
as often defended ourselves against their aspersions. 
Thus, from the commencement we have stood upon the 
defensive, and upon that ground alone as a society. 
And is there to be no end to their calumnies and abuses ? 

u Individuals, it is true, have, since the Yearly Meet- 
ing, become, both by connivance and otherwise, the de- 
fenders of corrupt principles and practices touching the 
subject of Slavery, exposed to some extent its position 
and the conduct of prominent members, for the purpose 
of condemning and correcting such errors, and I believe 
very properly too. 

c ' While ever a religious society does not in any way 
defend that which is wrong or sinful, it is the duty of its 
members not to expose the evil conduct of one individual 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 293 

out of Society. But whenever it undertakes to support 
such individual in his course, then it becomes a duty 
for those who are in the right, to expose and condemn 
both his conduct and that of the body that sustains him 
in it. 

u But to return to the quotation : he says it is true, that 
sometimes there are Anti-Slavery pieces in it (the Adv.), 
but they are few and far between. 

" What, let me ask, would a stranger to the paper infer 
from what is here presented ? 

u Would he suppose that there was one column in a 
number, that was not what our writer terms - anti-Quaker 
matter V But the fact is, out of some thirteen or fourteen 
which I have examined, taking in a number of those 
which contain the longest articles, there is not more than 
one-tenth part of the reading that has any allusion to the 
Society of Friends, or its opposition to modern Abolition. 

" And I do suppose that if all the articles were summed 
up, that have been published in that Journal since the 
Separation, in regard to the opposition of Friends to the 
cause, there would not be more than one-twentieth part 
of its contents that touches the subject at all. And if we 
should admit that such articles are not Anti-Slavery 
(which we do not, but believe their publication as neces- 
sary to the advancement of the cause as that of any oth- 
ers), there is scarcely one beside, to be found in it, or 
but very few, but what combat the evil of Slavery in some 
way or other. Even the articles taken from the Anti- 
Slavery paper he pretends to approve, which it contains, 
no person, it seems to me, of veracity, acquainted with 
it, will say are few and far between. So it is impossible 
to characterise his statement truly without pronouncing it 
false. And if he is acquainted with the paper, as it would 
seem from his remarks, it must be willfully so. If he is 
not, it is about the same thing in substance, for supposing 
that to be the case, he has given his readers to under- 
stand he knew what he at the same time knew he did not 
know. 

y The only extenuating circumstance that I can think 

18* 



294 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION W 

of, if it will be considered as such at all, is, that in all 
probability it was made under the influence of a par- 
oxysm of anger. His ' party feelings,' it would seem, must 
have so completely swallowed him up, that a sober, can- 
did thought was not allowed to produce its legitimate 
effects upon his mind. Is it not passing strange that any 
person should come out, under the pretense of entering 
into a candid and impartial examination — an expostula- 
tion with us, the seceders, expressing great desire that we 
may get from under the influence of party feeling, and at 
the same time exhibit such an intense party feeling in 
himself, as to manifest such a complete departure from 
all truth as our author has done in the case before us ? 

" He remarks, ' How much better it would be, if those 
who profess to be opposed to Slavery were to bring their 
testimony to bear on the system of Slavery itself, rather 
than waste their strength and influence, by publishing 
criminations against others.' 

"It would have been well if he and his party had 
thought of this sooner, for this is the very course they 
have pursued toward us, and the Abolitionists in general. 
Even in the last Address of their Yearly Meeting, to 
Christian professors, the Abolitionists are slanderously 
charged in a covert manner, by insinuation, with resort- 
ing to measures of confusion and violence. 

"These criminations are what we, as well as the edi- 
tor of the Advocate, have endeavored to ' push away,' 
and not any Anti-Slavery acts of theirs, because they 
4 do not come up and join our ranks.' Now, if he and 
the leaders in his party are the true friends of the slave, 
as he pretends [and happy should I be if circumstances 
did not render it impossible for me to believe it], would 
we not find them doing that which he represents to be so 
excellent in the editor of the Cincinnati Herald, that is, 
* laboring to bring all the Anti-Slavery feeling to bear 
upon the system of Slavery, and to expose its evils both 
on the master and the slave, and its encroachments on the 
free States V Can we believe that they regard such as a 
good work, when making Slavery a political question has 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 295 

been so frequently objected to by leaders among them, as 
utterly wrong in the Abolitionists ? If it is a good work 
they should certainly be at it. Will they do it, and 
cease publishing criminations against those who are at it ? 
And will they, with the Herald, support and advocate 
the Liberty Party movement, and vote for Abolitionists 
instead of slaveholders and Pro-Slavery men, as they 
have heretofore done i We shall see. 

"In order to prove that we ourselves are proscriptive, 
be professes to give a history of a certain temperance 
meeting. Now, this meeting was held not half a mile 
from the writer's residence, and the fact is, there was one 
member of his own Yearly Meeting, and but one of ours, 
instead of two or three, as he states, and that one did not 
advocate the resolution alluded to, as he represents, nor 
was he in favor of its adoption, while the member of his 
own Yearly Meeting did advocate it. Thus, according 
to his own theory, the true history of this meeting proves 
the proscriptive character of Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
All it seems that he could found his statement upon was, 
that this one Anti-Slavery Friend voted against this res- 
olution being laid on the table. Thus it appears, first 5 
that but one Anti-Slavery Friend was present; secondly, 
that the resolution presented was offered merely for dis- 
cussion; thirdly, the Friend only voted against laying it 
on the table, and lastly, that a member of his own Yearly 
Meeting voted in the same way and in addition actually 
advocated the resolution. 

" Now, even if his history of the temperance meeting 
was correct, and it would prove us proscriptive, then we 
should have no difficulty to prove that Indiana Yearly 
Meeting is Pro-Slavery ; for one of the overseers now 
active in taking up Anti-Slavery Friends has been heard 
to say, she would be afraid of her life if the slaves were 
set free. And at another time, that she would be afraid 
to go to a neighbor's house if they were set free. And 
again, another overseer, although he owned he would 
have no objection to helping a free colored person to 
Canada, or anywhere else, yet he would not help a slave 



296 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

on his way to a land of freedom. Another Friend, who 
has been somewhat active in assisting to disown the se- 
ceders, has been heard to say he would as soon harbor a 
horse-thief as a runaway negro; and yet another, who has 
in the same way been active, has stated that Slavery 
could not be wrong, for if it was, the first ship, that ever 
sailed after slaves, would have been sunk to the bottom 
of the ocean by Providential interference ; and all these 
in our author's own Monthly meeting. Many such cir- 
cumstances might be brought to view, but according to 
his logic I have instanced individual cases enough to es- 
tablish the Pro-Slavery character of his Yearly Meeting. 
But we do not pretend to charge that body with every- 
thing that any of its individual members have been guilty 
of, only so far as it supports them in it, or connives at 
their conduct, as he would most unfairly and ungener- 
ously have done in the instance before us, even if his 
statement were correct. And it is worthy of remark, 
that in nearly or quite every instance he has represented 
us as saying just what any individual may have chanced 
to say. Now, it must be a familiar circumstance to all 
acquainted with the course pursued by our opposers, that 
if they can discover anything in any of our writings, 
which they can construe to mean a charge upon the 
Yearly Meeting (although it was not so intended), which 
was only an individual act, they represent it as very un- 
fair indeed. Why then do some of them turn round and 
actually do the very same thing they have been trying to 
detect in us? And here let me say, that notwithstanding 
the extraordinary demonstrations of unsoundness in re- 
gard to our testimony against Slavery, in a number of the 
leading members of Indiana Yearly Meeting, 1 have no 
doubt but there is a large amount of good Anti-Slavery 
feeling in that body. Many persons remain in that con- 
nection to whom I feel a strong attachment, being well 
assured that it is the conduct of but a few, comparatively 
speaking, that keeps them from acting out their Anti- 
Slavery principles, and therefore I could not conscien- 
tiously charge them with what their leaders have done. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 297 

only so far as they continue to countenance them by sub- 
mission to their dictation, whereby they support them in 
their corrupt course and practice. 

" But let us proceed with his remarks. He says, 4 you 
say in your public papers that at the close of the meeting 
on First-day, at the Yearly Meeting, in 1842, you saw 
greater honor shown to Henry Clay than you had ever 
seen Friends show to any man however good or great — 
such eagerness to shake his blood-stained hand, etc. 5 
You then go on to say, 6 ic may however be pleaded as an 
extenuation of the great honors bestowed upon him by 
their eagerness to shake his blood-stained hands, their 
strong desire to evince to his mind their determined op- 
position to Abolitionists.' 

u In the first place, I would say in regard to this, why 
does he insinuate that we, as a Society, have a public or- 
gan, and that through such an organ we published this to 
the world ! I am confident he knew it was not so. The 
object undoubtedly was to create the impression that, as a 
Society, we had made the Advocate our special organ, 
and were accountable for everything published in it. 
But leaving this, why should he, professing so much im- 
partiality, garble the language of the editors. Instead 
of what he represented, the remark is this : ' the Friends, 
of both sexes gathered around Clay, apparently eager to 
shake his blood-stained hands.' By a comparison of his 
pretended quotations with what is said in the paper (See 
Advocate, Vol. II, No. 31), it will be found that the 
whole is unfairly set forth. The editors say, c though we 
believe such special honors, such marked attentions were 
never before PUBLICLY paid by Friends to any man, 
however good or great, as were on this occasion paid to 
this prince of slaveholders ;' but our author, it would seem, 
carefully excludes the word publicly, which all must see 
is of much importance in conveying their meaning. And 
beside this, those remarks were preceded by a notice of 
the fact that some Friends, no doubt of the leaders, 
waited on Clay to inform him that the Society had no 
hand in, and disapproved of, the presentation of the peti- 



298 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

tion asking him to liberate his slaves. I ask if this did 
not furnish just grounds for the editors to suppose they 
might wish to evince to his mind their determined oppo- 
sition to those who did present the petition — the Aboli- 
tionists ? And why did not our author notice and explain 
this affair so as to show it was not a manifest demonstra- 
tion of opposition to Abolitionists, before denying that 
his party had any such intention of manifesting it to 
Clay's mind by their marked attention to him? i 

" Again, he says, c now, why all this, but to endeavor 
to show that Friends shook hands with him because he 
was a slaveholder, and for what, I would ask, did you 
shake hands w r ith him? I confidently believe, that in 
proportion to the relative numbers in attendance at that 
place, there were more that shook hands w T ith him who 
were members of Anti-Slavery societies, than those who 
were not — I allude to Friends onlj\ Of those in one 
large Preparative meeting, so far as I know or believe, 
they were all enrolled members of An ti- Slavery societies, 
which has led me to believe, it was in a good degree so 
in other places also.' 

u I suppose the object of the editors was to show w^hat 
kind of a faithful testimony those Friends w T ere bearing 
against Slavery, w T hile thus opposing the Abolitionists, 
and rendering such signal honor to this prince of slave* 
holders. But as he applies his remarks to us, I would 
say, so far as we have alluded to this transaction, our 
Declaration shows plainly what was our object in alluding 
to it, viz : to compare this conduct of Friends toward a 
popular man, though a slaveholder, with their treatment 
of an eminent c modern ' Abolitionist, for the purpose of 
exhibiting their departure from genuine principles in re* 
gard to our testimony against Slavery. There was no 
intention of saying they did it merely because he was a 
slaveholder. We had no doubt but with their disposi- 
tion, as manifested by their conduct, if slave-holding had 
been as unpopular as Abolitionism, and Abolitionism as 
popular as slave-holding, their conduct would have been 
reversed. And we have the strongest ground for believ- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 299 

ing so from their own words, for they give it as a reason 
why they should not be identified with the Abolitionists, 
that they may thereby retain a place and influence with 
the rulers of the land. It was to gain the good opinions 
of Henry Clay, who, they supposed, would be one of the 
rulers of the land (for that was what he was seeking to 
be made), and being a noted Whig, they were willing to 
help forward the work, which induced them thus to act. 
But if it should so happen that the sentiment of the 
people should become so changed, as to elect Abolition- 
ists, why then, according to their doctrine, they would 
treat them with the same respect under similar circum- 
stances, in order to retain a place and influence with 
them, the rulers of the land. 

" But it would seem from his statement, that there 
was quite a number of Anti-Slavery Friends who 
gathered around Henry Clay, to shake hands with him, 
even more in proportion, than of other Friends. 4 ALL, 5 
it is said, in one large Preparative meeting who did so 5 
were enrolled members of Anti-Slavery societies. Now, 
4 why all this, but to endeavor' to deceive. We know 
very well what Preparative meeting he alludes to, and 
the fact is, there were but two Anti-Slavery Friends from 
it that did so; and but three that were enrolled members 
of Anti-Slavery societies, and one of these is now a 
member with himself. One of these told me that being 
near the scene of action, he was himself introduced to 
the slaveholder by the Clerk of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
(though ' not as Clerk,' it should be remembered), and 
that he did not then know, and has not since learned, 
that any but one other Abolitionist, than those referred to, 
did shake hands with him on that occasion, making four 
enrolled members in the whole Yearly Meeting, and but 
three Anti-Slavery Friends, among the hundreds that 
did. But in this, according to his wonted course, he has 
endeavored to divert the reader from the point. It was 
the \ special honors, the marked attentions, paid to this 
prince of slaveholders,' by their apparent eagerness to 
shake his blood-stained hand, that were objected to. and 



300 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

not an ordinary shaking of hands, with which he endea- 
vors to identify this man-worshiping transaction. It 
was their gathering round him in almost an impenetrable 
crowd in their eagerness to salute him. One or more of 
the women mounted over the backs of the benches, in a 
fruitless attempt to get at him. Some of the old Friends 
in the yard with their hats in hand, to save them from 
abuse, were seen pushing through the crowd to get near 
the 4 distinguished man.' No Anti-Slavery Friend, I 
suppose, would object to shaking hands with the greatest 
rogue in the world, provided it was not done in a way 
which would countenance him in his wickedness. 

" At the bottom of page 11, he asks: ; What can 
possibly be gained, either to you as Christians, or the 
Anti-Slavery cause, by continuing in such a course V 

"I think the reader, by this time, will see that we 
have not been in such a course at all as he represents; 
neither have we been building one another up, as he as- 
serts, with such false insinuations as he has been endea- 
voring to point out, but has utterly failed in the attempt. 
Our course has been to repel the slanderous charges our 
opposers have preferred against us, and the Abolitionists 
in general, by the exhibition of Truth, and I believe, 
nothing but the truth. And we expect to continue to 
4 gain the reward of an approving conscience, if we also 
continue in well-doing as Christians, and then the gain 
to the Anti- Slavery cause by our course, will be, in one 
point of view, according to our humble abilities, a 
defense thereof, and its advocates against, not only the 
assaults of open enemies, but the foul aspersions of 
pseudo- Abolitionists. 

u Again, he observes : ' If the testimony of Friends 
against Slavery, has in times past had any influence in 
the world, are not such things calculated to do it away V 
' Is not telling the slaveholder and others who connive at 
that system of injustice and oppression, that the Society 
of Friends are throwing their influence against the cause 
of emancipation, strengthening their hands V 

" In addition to my former remarks, in regard to simi- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 301 

lar sentiments, in another part of the document, I would 
say ; I believe the testimony of Friends in times past- 
has had a powerful influence ; and it is a source of con- 
solation to believe, as I confidently do, that all the efforts 
of their professed successors at the present time, in 
opposing and villifying Abolitionists, will not be able to 
do away the effect of that testimony. It is for endeavor- 
ing to maintain it inviolate, according to the dictates of 
our consciences, that we have suffered untold contumely 
and reproach by these false brethren. Their own acts, 
and not ours, in exposing and condemning them, have 
done away the influence of their testimony. I recently 
witnessed an occurrence, giving positive proof of it, and 
a number of others will testify to the same. In a col- 
lection of Whigs, when one of their chief speakers had 
declared himself opposed to immediate emancipation, 
and avowed that this was the Whig doctrine, an Aboli- 
tionist (a member of the body), turning to a Friend, re- 
minded him, that that could not be the true doctrine of 
the Whig party, for the members of the Society of Friends 
were generally Whigs, and believed in immediate and 
unconditional emancipation. But he was stopped by this 
Whig, a man who had been in the Legislature of the 
State, and told that such were not the principles of the 
Society of Friends. He was willing to admit, they had 
held such formerly, but they did not now, and gathered 
up one of their recent documents to prove the point, and 
one or more of the Anti-Abolitionists of the ' body,' pre- 
sent publicly united in sentiment with him. This con- 
clusion, it should be remembered, was arrived at without 
the aid of any of the Abolitionists, and one even opposed 
coming to such a conclusion. The people have the docu- 
ments of Friends themselves, and they know what they 
say. It is from this source, and the general carriage of 
Friends toward modern or immediate Abolition, that the 
opposers of the cause get their information, and not from 
us, for they do not so generally read our papers. 

" It would require a considerable extension of this re- 
ply to notice all the errors, contradictions and false insin- 

14 



302 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

nations contained in the pamphlet under consideration* 
It seems to me there are but few sentences in it but what 
contain something of the kind. As a specimen of what 
I have passed over, I will instance his very first sentence, 
in which he supposes that Friends constitute the only re- 
ligious society in America, that denies church member- 
ship to slaveholders, and virtually charges us with say- 
ing, it is \ not opposed to Slavery. 5 

" Little as I know about the matter, I could name 
some half dozen religions societies in America which 
deny church membership to slaveholders ; but we cannot, 
with him, suppose their doing so is any certain evidence 
they are right on the subject. We, however, nevei* 
stated that Indiana Yearly Meeting was not in any degree 
opposed to Slavery, as is here insinuated. A person 
who advocates gradual emancipation, shows that he is to 
some extent opposed to Slavery ; yet who cannot see 
that he is not completely Anti-Slavery, but is in favor of 
continuing the system for a time, and therefore so far 
Pro-Slavery. As our author is doubtless acquainted with 
our concessions at different times, in regard to this matter, 
and our statement of their position relative to the subject 
of Slavery, which I have already noticed, giving a differ- 
ent view r from what he has presented, I cannot but regard 
this effort and others not brought to view, as a willful and 
deliberate attempt to deceive. 

"In conclusion, I would present the reader with a 
synopsis of this most extraordinary document. The author 
notices a few of the circumstances or proceedings of the 
Yearly Meeting, to which we referred, for the purpose of 
comparing them with other proceedings of the meeting, 
in order to prove a departure from genuine Anti-Slavery 
principle, and then declares that we gave them as our 
reasons for seceding. But our arguments, derived from 
these comparisons, he never once notices at all; thus 
proving conclusively, at least one of tw r o things, either 
that he is devoid of common understanding, or else care- 
ful to avoid that impartial examination he professes to 
desire should take place. He represents us as having 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 303 

seceded for the sake of appointments, because we made 
known our grievances ; but he never deigns to notice the 
fact so clearly exhibited, that we did it mainly to show 
that liberty of conscience was denied us* He has en- 
deavored to palm it upon the mind of his reader, that 
their declaring and recording those members of the Meet* 
ing for Sufferings, was just as an ordinary circumstance 
of merely not appointing persons at certain times, when 
judged not to be the appropriate ones for the service pro- 
posed. He represents us in various instances, as saying 
or doing, or taking a position that we never did at all, 
and then brings forward his arguments to subvert it; 
thus, it would seem, erecting a man of straw, for the 
purpose of showing his dexterity in demolishing his own 
fabrications. In almost every instance, he has endea- 
vored with the most underhanded maneuvering to divert 
the reader from the point at issue — to shift off on to a 
different ground from that of the true one. He has even 
descended into that which one would suppose a wise 
man would blush to find himself engaged in, such being 
so perfectly foolish, contemptible, and insignificant, 
giving evidence that he could not, or would not under- 
stand the plainest common-sense documents. And I 
confess, when Hook at the positions which I have had to 
examine, and the statements to which I have had to re- 
ply, it appears like very small business indeed, but as 
they were of such a character as to cast much odium if 
believed, upon the cause of truth, I can conceive of no 
better way than to meet him upon his own positions and 
statements, foolish and absurd as they are. 

" That an impartial examination of the conduct, senti- 
ments, arguments, and positions exhibited on both sides 
may take place, is my sincere desire ; and that it was 
not the intention of the writer of the ' expostulation,' to 
elicit such examination, but to divert the reader from it, 
I trust I have abundantly demonstrated. 

" I should indeed feel greatly rejoiced to meet with an 
evidence from him or his party, that they were disposed 
to listen to the convictions of conscience. And let me 



804 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

say, Friends, suppress it as you may (which I have the 
strongest evidence a number of you have done in regard 
to this matter), the time will come when you can no 
longer stifle its voice. It will speak, and speak terror to 
the guilty soul, to those who have stubbornly disregarded 
its injunctions. 

" Happy, thrice happy, will those be at that awful 
day, who are prepared c to meet their naked hearts 
alone. 5 



" Spiceland, Fifth month, 1844." 



" Walter Edgerton*" 



CHAPTER XXIT. . 

Address to the Meeting for Sufferings of Ldndoii. 

In the forepart of the year 1844, the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings thought right to issue the Address which I give 
below. It is one of much importance as unfolding the 
true position of the parties involved. 

"From the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting of Anti- Slavery Friends, to the Meeting for 
Sufferings of Friends in London. 

"Dear Friends: — 

" Notwithstanding, on the return of our friend, Ar- 
nold Buffum, from London, who carried over our former 
Epistle, we learned that it was not accepted by you, we 
feel that it is right again, in brotherly love, to address 
you. 

"We know of no reason why we should not regard 
each other as brethren, united by one common bond of 
Christian fellowship, entertaining like views of Christian 
duty, and practically carrying out our views by like 
measures. 

" The religion of our faith teaches us that we are to 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 305 

know men by their fruits — that as a good tree bringeth 
forth good fruits, -so a good man will manifest the charac- 
ter of his faith by his works. 

" Taking this for a criterion of judgment, we regard 
you as one in faith with ourselves, and we feel that a loss 
will be sustained to the cause of humanity, should two 
bodies thus circumstanced permit any minor considera- 
tion to estrange them from each other. It is true, we 
have assumed a term of designation which you do not 
use ; in our case, there was a necessity for it for the pur- 
pose of distinction ; with you, happily, no such necessity 
exists. 

" There is no body of people in your land, bearing the 
title of Friends, who do not actively co-operate with 
others in promoting those measures which are needful 
for procuring the restoration of their rights to the en- 
slaved millions of our fellow-men ; with us it is otherwise. 
The body with which we were formerly associated under 
the common appellation of Friends, left us no alternative 
but to cease from our labors in support of Anti-Slavery 
societies (whether acting in connection with other people 
or by ourselves alone), or submit to a system of proscrip- 
tion and disfranchisement approximating at every step 
to that of complete disownment therefrom (which, from 
the measures put in train, was most undoubtedly the 
determination ultimately to accomplish without a with- 
drawal of our support from those societies), the former 
we could not do and be guiltless, the latter would greatly 
defeat the object of our labors — deprive us of those privi- 
leges which we hold most dear, and of the power of giv- 
ing that aid to the cause which justice and duty demanded 
at our hands. 

" We are aware that those from whom we have sepa- 
rated, profess to bear a faithful testimony against Slavery; 
but if they really do so, why did they adopt those pro- 
scriptive measures which forced upon us the alternative 
of silence or separation ? Did they allege that we were 
guilty of any violation of good order, except our disre- 



306 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

gard of their injunctions to refrain from giving our sup- 
port to the present Anti-Slavery movement ? 

" When a call came from your land over the signature 
of one of your most beloved ministers, who has since 
been called from his devoted labors to the enjoyment of 
his reward, summoning the friends of the enslaved to 
meet in a general Convention in London, in the Sixth 
month last, to promote measures for procuring their deli- 
verance from oppression, did our opposers, by responding 
to that call, give evidence of their sympathy with the 
oppressed ? 

"Have they read in any of their meetings, or circu- 
lated even in their families, the Address to Christian 
professors, unanimously adopted by that Convention? 
Do they contribute to the support of any periodical which 
is devoted to the advocacy of the immediate and uncon- 
ditional emancipation of the enslaved ? 

"Are they engaged in any systematical course of mea- 
sures calculated to arouse the nation to the enormity of 
the crime of enslaving one-sixth part of the children born 
in our land S 

" Do they not, on the contrary, manifest far greater 
hostility to every effort for promoting the cause of uni- 
versal emancipation, than the abominations and wicked- 
ness of Slavery ? 

" Do they not, more than any other religious denomi- 
nation in our country, close their doors and their own 
ears against those who are pleading the cause of the op- 
pressed, so that if all others were to follow their example 
in these respects, those who are thus engaged would 
obtain no houses to speak in and nobody to hear them % 

" Do they not, by their persevering hostility to the 
abolition enterprise, give the weight of their influence 
to the perpetuation of Slavery ? 

"Has not one Yearly Meeting on this Continent, 
recently promulgated its condemnation of the act of giv- 
ing shelter, in any way whatever, to a fellow-creature 
escaping from his cruel oppressor ? 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 307 

"A faithful answer to these inquiries would exhibit the 
practical testimony of their Society as bearing against 
Abolition rather than against Slavery. 

"On referring to the list of names constituting the 
Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Soci- 
ety, we find that a considerable majority of them are 
among the most highly esteemed members of the Society 
of Friends in England. In the Address issued by that 
Committee, shortly after the formation of the Society, we 
find a Resolution unanimously adopted by the society, in 
these words : ; That it be recommended to the Anti- 
Slavery Friends, throughout the world, to form Auxiliary 
societies upon the principles of, and in connection with, 
this society.' In the same Address they say, ; The com- 
mittee would have felt delighted to have referred particu- 
larly to the gigantic efforts made by the Abolitionists of 
the United States of America, to purge their institutions 
from the stain, and their people from the guilt, of Slav- 
ery * * but their limits forbid.' 

"Again, in the third annual Report, we find the fol- 
lowing language of encouragement to faithfulness in the 
cause held out to us by a society measurably controlled 
by the most prominent members of your Yearly Meeting: 
^ Resolved unanimously, That this meeting regards with 
deep interest the enlightened efforts and noble sacrifices 
of the Abolitionists of the United States of America in the 
sacred cause of human freedom; and, while it sympathizes 
with them in their struggles, heartily rejoices in the more 
extensive prevalence, and in the certain and not far dis- 
tant triumph, of their principles ; and publicly renews the 
offer of its warm and steady co-operation.' 

"By the same Report we learn, that 'the standing 
committee of the Society of Friends, from funds at its 
disposal,' presented to the Anti-Slavery society the sum of 
£800, giving a practical demonstration of the effectual con- 
currence of English Friends with the Anti-Slavery cause. 

" What Yearly Meeting in America has given any 
evidence of this kind, of the reality of its testimony 
against Slavery ? 



308 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

a We believe that in addition to our duty as members 
of religious society, we have high responsibilities de- 
volved upon us as men, as citizens of the State, and as 
members of the human family; and we sincerely pray 
that we may be preserved from that spirit of selfishness 
which would as effectually shut us from the exercise of 
Christian philanthropy, as would a seclusion from the 
world within the walls of a monastery. We remember that 
our divine Master prayed his Father, not that he should 
take his disciples out of the world, but that he should keep 
them from the evil. 

" So long as intemperance, oppression, and war 
abound in the world, we believe there is something for 
us to do, beside merely sending out an annual expression 
of our testimony against those great abominations. 

a We believe that those terrible evils are to be done 
away by the dissemination of light among the nations, 
impressing upon the understanding and the conscience 
of the people a deep and abiding conviction of the great 
immorality of those popular customs, which sink the 
mass of mankind into a condition of wretchedness and 
woe, and tend powerfully to perpetuate among them 
moral degradation and crime. We know of no instru- 
mentality by which this important work is likely to be 
accomplished, but by the organization of associations 
expressly for this purpose ; and we feel it to be consistent 
with our own peace of mind, and with the best interests 
of Society, that we should, like you, co-operate with 
Christian philanthropists of all denominations who, by 
their willingness to devote themselves to so good a work, 
give the best evidence that they are influenced by the 
spirit of Divine love. 

" We have been encouraged to go forward in this way, 
in our endeavors to promote the abolition of Slavery and 
to establish the true doctrine of human rights, not only 
by your example and recommendations, as already cited 
from the Anti-Slavery reports, but more especially, by 
the triumphant issue of your labors in the cause of bleed- 
ing humanity, as evinced in the abolition of Slavery in 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 309 

the British West India colonies, and by the repeated 
Advices issued from your own body and from the Yearly 
Meeting of Friends in London, urging Friends in Ame- 
rica to greater faithfulness in advocating the cause of the 
down-trodden and oppressed. 

" In the 23d number of the Herald of Peace, published 
in London, we find a statement exhibiting the very im- 
portant fact that, by the timely interposition of the Peace 
Society of New York a war between the United States 
and Mexico was most happily averted. Had no such 
society existed, it appears highly probable that instead 
of peace being preserved, the American Continent might 
ere now have been watered w T ith the blood of men slain 
in the field of battle. Shall we rejoice at the good results 
of the philanthropic labors of other men, and refuse our- 
selves to participate with them in their labors ? This 
instance, to our mind, furnishes a striking illustration of 
the blessing of Divine goodness attendant on the Chris- 
tian efforts of associated action in promoting the peace 
and happiness of mankind. Although we cannot but 
feel conscious, as we before observed, of the existence of 
a similarity of religious principles and views of Christian 
duty between us, yet having once tendered to you the 
right hand of fellowship, we should, perhaps, have been 
contented not to have repeated it, had it not been for a 
deep and abiding conviction resting upon our minds, that 
the enlargement of our brethren and sisters in suffering 
and bonds is deeply involved in the matter. While the 
relation, which now exists, continues between us, the 
opposers of the Anti-Slavery cause will refer to it as 
positive evidence that our Anti-Slavery course, and con- 
sequently that of the Abolitionists of the nation, is wrong, 
and, therefore, should not be countenanced in the least 
degree whatever, for our opposers have openly, in a 
recent anonymous publication, declared in the most une- 
quivocal terms their hostility to modern Abolition socie- 
ties. Again, it is, and will continue to be referred to, to 
prove the oft repeated and senseless assertion, that Abo- 
lition in this country is entirely a different thing from 



310 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

what it is in your land, and thus the whole weight of 
your influence is and will be made to bear against the 
whole Anti-Slavery movement in our country. Under 
this view, which is most certainly a correct one, the sub- 
ject assumes an aspect of the utmost importance. And 
here permit us to quote to you the language of your 
Yearly Meeting, to Friends of Indiana, in 1836. 'It is 
with lively feelings of interest in the welfare and pros- 
perity of your country, that we venture to suggest to your 
consideration whether there are not indications of an 
approaching crisis in this momentous question, in which 
it will mainly depe?id, under Divine Providence, on the 
faithful conduct of those who act on Christian princi- 
ples, whether Slavery shall he abolished in your land by 
peaceful legislation or by confusion and violence? 

"This sentiment has been effectually sealed upon our 
minds; and hence it is that we deem it of the first impor- 
tance, that those who act on Christian principle, should 
be faithful, consistent, and uncompromising in their 
course, otherwise will they not inevitably condemn them- 
selves in the things which they allow ? 

"In humble reliance upon the God of the oppressed, 
we have come out from among those who sought to 
abridge our rights, to plead the cause of the suffering 
and the dumb, and we have taken our stand on the same 
ground, so long and so successfully occupied by you, and 
we now, once more come to you, tendering the hand of 
Christian fellowship in your labors of love, in which we 
shall rejoice, in our humble sphere; to co-operate with 
you for promoting the removal of the abuses which bru- 
talize and degrade men, and fill the world with wretched* 
ness and crime, asking of you a brotherly return. 

" Should you deem this proposal of a friendly corres- 
pondence worthy of acceptance, we ask the favor of 
having this communication read also in your Yearly 
Meeting, with a request of that meeting to forward to us 
a few lines, opening the way to a permanent corre- 
spondence. 

"And now may the God of all grace guide and direct 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. Sll 

both you and ns in all our labors for the advancement of 
the cause of the Redeemer's kingdom among men, and 
to Him be all the glory, now and forever, Amen. 

" Signed in and by direction of the meeting aforesaid, 
held by adjournments on the 22d and 23d of Second 
month, 1844. " Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 



CHAPTEE XXY. 

Address to the Members of the Society of Friends individually consti- 
tuting London Yearly Meeting — Postscript touching the Treatment of 
Dublin Yearly Meeting. 

Two Epistles, one from London and the other from 
Dublin, were sent this year to the Meeting for Sufferings 
of Indiana Yearly Meeting and put in circulation, con- 
taining serious reflections upon the Society of Anti-Sla- 
very Friends. In consequence of this, when the annual 
meeting of that Society was held, it addressed the follow- 
ing to Friends individually of London Yearly Meeting, 
and appended a postscript thereto, touching the treatment 
of Dublin Yearly Meeting. It was induced to pursue 
this course, because those meetings had refused to accept 
any communication from it, and there appeared to be no 
other way to be heard. 



" ADDRESS 

" To the Members of the Society of Friends individually, 
constituting London Yearly Meeting. 

"Dear Friekds: — 

" We have at this time received a copy of a Minute o 
London Yearly Meeting, which, it seems, was intended? 



312 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

for our last Yearly Meeting, but which did not come to 
hand till it had passed ; showing that our Address to that 
body was not read or accepted by it. And as this seems 
to be the only opportunity now left us, whereby we can 
unburden our minds to you, we have thought proper 
thus publicly to address you. In the first place, we 
would observe that it is with feelings of much regret 
that we feel constrained at the present time, to notice a 
document recently put in circulation by the Meeting for 
Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, purporting to be 
an Epistle from the Meeting for Sufferings of London 
Yearly Meeting, evidently containing reflections of a 
serious character against us. 

" The first sentiment to which we would refer, is the 
following : ' While the irregularity of the proceedings of 
those who have separated themselves, is thus altogether 
discountenanced by Friends in this country, we feel 
bound to observe that the designation of 'A. S. Friends, 5 
assumed by them, implies a surrender on your part, of 
the testimony of the Society against Slavery ; which we 
are fully convinced is unwarranted.' The question here 
occurs, what is meant by the term, ' irregularity of pro- 
ceeding V We are informed by the Minute of London 
Yearly Meeting that that Yearly Meeting was of the judg- 
ment that it w T ould be a departure from good order to 
accept the communication of our Yearly Meeting, sent to 
that body last year. It is evident, therefore, that their 
being 'fully convinced,' as they observed in regard to the 
premises, proceeded from testimony all on one side, as 
that from our Yearly Meeting could not be heard. Does 
our law, as Friends and as Christians, condemn a man 
unheard, and without even listening to the evidences he 
may offer in his favor ? If not, by what rule are hun- 
dreds of persons condemned at once in the same way ? 
Is it any less wrong, because many are affected by it ? 
They tell Friends of Indiana Yearly Meeting, that they 
are especially desirous that the manifestation of an open 
and brotherly feeling toward us, should be cherished by 
them. The very anomalous position which our Friends 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 313 

of that Yearly Meeting have taken, in various respects, 
warrants us in remarking, that example speaks much 
louder than precept. While they recommend this course 
to Friends of the old Yearly Meeting of Indiana, they, 
themselves, are so far from an open and brotherly feeling 
toward us, that they will not even hear us in our own de- 
fense. Is this brotherly ? Is it kind ? We do not forget 
the reasons assigned, that it would be a departure from 
good order to read or accept a communication from us ; 
but we have yet to learn what right order would thereby 
be violated. Would they not read and accept a respect- 
ful address from almost any body of professed Christians 
in the world, who make no claim of being Friends ? 
And if they are disposed, as the American Yearly Meet- 
ings have been, they would read one from the Indians 
with much pleasure ; even from such as make no preten- 
sions to Christianity at all. Receiving and reading our 
Address need not necessarily imply an acknowledgment 
of the correctness of our course. They could, after an 
examination of the evidences, if they had thereby found 
to their satisfaction that we were wrong, have recorded 
their judgment and the reasons whereon it was founded. 
That would have been right. If they really feel con- 
cerned for our welfare, why should they not speak to 
us in ' an open and brotherly manner,' as they recom- 
mend to our opposers, and show us, as brethren ought to 
do, wherein we are wrong ? If it is contrary to good 
order to read our communications, or to speak to us, we 
cannot see how it is in accordance with good order to 
speak about us, and against us, without first, at least, 
hearing our defense. 

" And to shift the subject a little ; can any person sup- 
pose, that if a majority of Friends in America, or even a 
majority of the leading influences alone, of Indiana Yearly 
Meeting, had adopted our course, and the minority had 
seceded and left us on that account, that they would 
not have acknowledged our course to be right ? It can- 
not be. We are confirmed in this view, from various 
circumstances, and first, our course, in regard to this 



814 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION Iff 

question, is that which they have pursued in their coun* 
try. Secondly, they have individually, in the capacity 
of members of the Executive Committee of the British and 
Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, and in various other ways, 
given their countenance and support to the Anti-Slavery 
movement in this country, set on foot in the very man- 
ner, for activity in which we were driven to the necessity 
of seceding, which, we suppose, is the irregularity to 
which they refer. Hence it is plain that they would 
have been heartily glad if Friends generally in this 
country had been actively engaged with those they have, 
as members of the Executive Committee, so highly eulo* 
gized, and to which their Yearly Meeting exhorted in 
plain and unequivocal terms, in the General Epistle of 
1830. 

" What, then, is the principle by which they are gov- 
erned? It is nothing short of this; the majority should 
rule. It is scarcely necessary to remark, as all must 
readily see, that this is in direct opposition to one of the 
fundamental principles of the Society. 

u And to what point, dear friends, will such principles 
and measures lead us ? If the existing organization of 
Society, and the preservation of the common order of set- 
ting up a Yearly Meeting, be considered of more impor- 
tance than righteousness and purity, are we not fallen 
back into papal heresy ? And if this doctrine had been 
adhered to, by George Fox and all the early reformers, 
could there have been such a body in the world as the 
Society of Friends at the present time ? Hence it is, 
that we are constrained to declare, that justice and right 
did, and still does demand an impartial examination into 
the facts relative to the controversy, totally independent 
of numbers or originality of organization, and a decision 
according to the evidence from both sides, before declar- 
ing that they were fully convinced that we were in the 
wrong, as is the evident import of their expressions. If, 
however, they had been so kind as to have manifested 
an open and brotherly feeling toward us, sufficient to 
have accepted our testimony or evidence in our own 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 315 

defense, they would have seen that the designation, Anti- 
Slavery, did not attach itself to those we have left, 
according to their own showing. 

"They declared it to be of hurtful tendency, to mem- 
bers of Society, to open meeting-houses for the purpose 
of holding Anti-Slavery meetings. It was not against 
opening them to a particular, designated kind, whose 
practice was shown to be wrong, but against opening 
them to Anti-Slavery meetings, in the broadest sense of 
the term. They also, in another Minute of Advice, where 
they caution Friends not to join in the over-active zeal 
of A. S. societies, virtually and in effect, charged all 
Anti-Slavery societies with being over-actively zealous* 
In a Minute of Advice issued by the Select Yearly Meet- 
ing in 1842, to the Select Quarters, they made the follow- 
ing declaration: 'The meeting, in an especial manner, 
was exercised in regard to some of the members of this 
body joining Anti- Slavery societies in opposition to the 
repeated advice of this Yearly Meeting.' 

"From what has been said, it is clear that they op- 
posed Anti-Slavery in its broadest and most unqualified 
sense, and not any particular kind of Anti-Slavery action, 
and, consequently, that they opposed and proscribed us 
for being Anti-Slavery. And to us it is clear, that 5 
although we adopted the designation alluded to, the cir- 
cumstances under which we were placed, and the lan- 
guage and treatment of our opposing friends, naturally 
imposed it upon us. And if it implies an entire surren- 
der on their part, of their testimony against Slavery, as 
is clearly signified by the document under consideration, 
our opposers themselves are accountable for it, inas- 
much as they publicly surrendered all affinity of feeling 
for all Anti-Slavery measures and actions. We would 
not, however, be understood to say that they did not, at 
the same time, profess to be firmly opposed to Slavery. 
We are aware that this was the fact. But the explana- 
tion of this incongruity is their business and not ours. 

"An examination of our writings will show that we 
have not, at any time, charged them with not being in 



S16 HISTORY 0# THE SEPARATION IN 

any degree opposed to Slavery. And we are totally un^ 
able to see why the assumption of the distinctive appel> 
lation of Anti-Slavery on our part, should imply an en- 
tire surrender of their testimony. 

" Let us illustrate. A Yearly Meeting, after having 
held and advocated the doctrine of immediate emancipa- 
tion, changes its opinions, and adopts the sentiment that 
gradual emancipation is the best plan. Now, who can- 
not see that in this there would be a partial surrender of 
our testimony against Slavery, and that should a portion 
of that Yearly Meeting continue, at the same time, to 
hold the doctrine of immediate emancipation, the term 
Anti-Slavery could, with much more propriety, be ap- 
plied to them than the others. And we have given the 
evidences, which our opposers have never pretended to 
controvert, showing that their testimony is, indeed, a 
crippled one, independent of their opposition to modern 
abolition societies. Witness the actions of their mem- 
bers in voting for slaveholders and Pro-Slavery men, and 
their free use of slave-labor produce, and the prohibition 
of the examination of the abstinence question, in the 
Yearly Meeting, together with the eulogies passed upon 
them by some of the open and avowed advocates of per- 
petual Slavery, in one of which it was stated, that they 
took the right ground in relation to this subject, that is, 
that the slaves must be prepared for freedom before 
they should receive that great boon. This declaration 
being publicly made, has never since been contradicted, 
though they have been reminded of it at different 
times. 

"And if it were not harsh to quote our London Friends 
against themselves, we could show that they had appre- 
hensions that the testimony of our opposers against Sla- 
very, was not as it should be ; for they say they c believe 
if they were sufficiently alive to the bearings of this 
great subject, upon the welfare, temporally and spiritu- 
ally of mankind, they would be more prompt in finding, 
and faithful in availing themselves of opportunities for 
individual effort, and thus be instrumental in hastening 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 317 

the time when all unchristian prejudices and distinctions 
should be swept away.' This is, truly, our sentiment. 
And it was because we were more prompt in finding and 
faithful in availing ourselves of opportunities for this in- 
dividual effort, which they say is our duty to do, and 
which efforts our opposers endeavored to prohibit, that 
we have been forced to the necessity of assuming a cor- 
respondent distinctive appellation from those who refused 
to be thus prompt and faithful. 

" In another place, the Meeting for Sufferings of Lon- 
don, observes: -it has seemed to us, that the circum- 
stances of the case which have been the immediate cause 
of your addressing our meeting, call in an especial 
manner, for the exercise of patience, forbearance and 
charity ; we would also express our warm and affection- 
ate desire, that Friends may, in the feeling of Christian 
love and interest toward those who have left, be enabled 
in the meekness of wisdom, to extend to them the lan- 
guage of invitation to return to the unity of the body, 
and that the way to this desirable end, may in all re- 
spects be made as easy as a due regard to the order of 
truth will permit. 5 

u Now, the question occurs, what would be a due re- 
gard to the order of truth, in the estimation of our trans- 
atlantic Friends ? Would it not be for our opposers to 
undo all that they have done, contrary to the known 
practice and advice of those Friends ? Are we to sup- 
pose they would advise to a course contrary to the order 
of truth, if they knew it? 

" Viewing those Friends as consistent, we must sup- 
pose that their idea of an observance of a due regard to 
the order of truth, would induce our opposers to rescind 
their advice against opening meeting-houses to Anti- 
Slavery meetings, and that against Friends joining with 
others in the Anti-Slavery cause, and all others, casting 
odium upon it, for all these are contrary to the order of 
truth, in the view of our English Friends, as is evinced 
by their continued and persevering action in direct oppo- 

14* 



318 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

sition thereto. It must also necessarily embrace an 
obliteration of all the Minutes and proceedings standing 
against us for going in opposition to that which is con- 
trary to the order of truth, in the view of those Friends, 
for it would surely take all this to make the way for a 
return, as easy as a due regard to that order would per- 
mit. If this is the idea intended to be conveyed by our 
friends, which it must be, if they are consistent, we ap- 
prove of the exhortation. 

" It is in this way alone, unless our judgment should 
be convinced that we are in error, that a re-union can be 
effected, while we retain our allegiance to Him whose 
right it is to rule in the hearts of all men, and who de- 
clared, I am the Lord, that is my name, and my glory 
will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven 
images. 

" Can we suppose that they would have us obtain a 
unity with those we have left, at the expense of our 
Anti-Slavery efforts, in regard to which they havp spoken 
so highly of us, we being of the American Abolitionists, 
which they as members of the Executive Committee, re- 
ferred to in such terms of commendation. Such a sup- 
position would be placing them in a very unfavorable 
light indeed. Nor yet would it place them in a much 
more favorable position to suppose they do not know, 
that to return to a unity with the body, while those ad- 
vices remain unrepealed, would be an actual abandon- 
ment of those very efforts which they have exhorted us 
to be prompt in using. 

"And we would here observe, we hope and trust there 
never will be a re-union while that body retains the po- 
sition it has taken in regard to the Anti-Slavery cause, 
unless we should be convinced that we are mistaken in 
relation to this point. And in order to a just settlement 
of the controversy, we ask investigation. We hold our- 
selves ready, should any body of Friends, either in Eng- 
land or America, feel disposed to do us the justice to 
examine the evidences on both sides, and act as umpire 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 319 

between us and our opposing Friends, to make all ne- 
cessary arrangements on our part to bring about such an 
event. 

" Such a course is not unprecedented. An instance 
of this kind may be found in Gouglrs history, in case of 
the separation of Wilkinson, Story and others. There 
is, however, a difference in the two cases, so far as the 
present has been tested, and it remains for time to show, 
whether that difference will continue. Wilkinson and 
his fellow-seceders were unwilling to come to a public 
discussion of the difficulties between them and those they 
left, while the others were anxious for it. In the present 
case, the seceders have been all the time very anxious for 
such a discussion, while those they have left, have mani- 
fested a great aversion to it. 

" It is highly probable that you are not aware of many 
things with which we have to contend, as many of them 
have not come to the public eye, one of which we will 
here mention, and which, we believe, did more to pros- 
trate the friends of the slave in Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
than any other act, owing to its secret character, and 
although we may be thought by some to violate a fafth 
reposed in us, by making public that which was designed 
only for the benefit of one department in Society, yet if 
there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed, nor 
hid, that shall not be made known, we trust, under the 
present peculiar circumstances, we shall be excused for 
setting it forth in our own defense. We allude to the 
Epistle of Advice, issued by the Yearly Meeting of 
Ministers and Elders of Indiana, in 1843, which we have 
quoted in the foregoing, but of which, we deem it proper 
to give a more full account. That meeting found on the 
reports from one of the Quarters, an answer (which ori- 
ginated in a Select Preparative, where there were none 
of that body who had in any way connected themselves 
with A. S. societies), to the query, ' Are Friends in unity 
one with another, and with the meetings to which they 
belong,' that they were, except that they differed in their 
views relative to Friends joining A. S. societies; where- 



320 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

upon a committee was appointed, to take the subject into 
consideration, and if way should open, to prepare an 
Address or Epistle of Advice to the subordinate meetings, 
and to propose the names of a suitable number of Friends 
to attend with it, and labor where such deficiencies 
existed. That committee reported at a future sitting, an 
epistle, together with a committee of twenty-seven Min- 
isters and Elders to carry it down to the subordinate 
meetings, and see to the enforcing of the advice therein 
contained, which report was received, the committee ap- 
pointed, and they directed to proceed to their work of 
suppressing all Anti-Slavery labors, which were then 
being carried forward by individuals connected with that 
body. We will not here state the extreme lengths to 
which this committee went, for the removal of every ves- 
tige of Abolitionism within their jurisdiction, but we will 
take a few quotations from their document, and ask our 
English Friends, how many Ministers and Elders they 
had at that time, who were not offenders in the opinion 
of that Select Yearly Meeting. Take the following quo- 
tations : 

•' c The meeting in an especial manner was exercised 
in regard to some of the members of this body joining 
Anti-Slavery societies, in opposition to the repeated ad- 
vice of the Yearly Meeting. And in respect to others 
who are giving their strength and encouragement to 
those individuals who have thus acted.' ' The spirit 
which would set at naught the advice of the Yearly 
meeting, it J§ believed, is not qualified to administer the 
discipline. If Ministers and Elders disregard the solemn 
acts of the Yearly Meeting, the example to our young 
Friends would be highly injurious.' Here, the reader 
will perceive that the exercise of the meeting, was in 
regard to some of its members joining Anti-Slavery so- 
cieties, and not for joining societies of other kinds, and 
that the meeting was also exercised on account of others, 
who were giving their strength that way, but who had 
not connected themselves with any Anti-Slavery organ- 
ization. And here are the reasons. The Yearly Meet- 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 321 

ing had advised against Anti-Slavery action, on the part 
of its members, and if ministers and elders should dis- 
regard that advice, and continue to labor, their example 
would induce young Friends to do so likewise. Friends 
would soon be called Abolitionists, and lose ' their place 
and influence with the rulers of the land.' Therefore all 
ministers and elders who remained in connection with 
Anti-Slavery organizations, or favored those who were 
thus connected, were believed to be under the influence 
of that spirit which disqualified them for administering 
the discipline, even in a Preparative meeting. Thus 
being borne down and pressed upon, many who had 
hitherto given proof of much usefulness in the Anti- 
Slavery enterprise, were induced to cease their labors, 
and now stand numbered with that host of opponents 
against which the friends of the bondman have to con- 
tend. 

" But to return to the subject. Where would the min- 
isters and elders of London Yearly Meeting have been, 
if the same measures had been forced upon them, which 
were upon us ? Even the departed W. Allen, would have 
been numbered with transgressors for the labor which^he 
wrought in his day, as certainly as that Charles Osborne, 
and others now bear reproach for their labors in the same 
cause, on this side the Atlantic. 

" In conclusion, dear Friends, we would remark, that 
in our opinion, a very great responsibility rests upon you 
individually, in regard to this matter, both as respects 
the character and usefulness of the Society in America, 
and the cause of the suffering slave, whose chains are 
riveted by the acts of a great majority of Friends in this 
country. We feel deeply and firmly attached to the 
principles, doctrines, testimonies and practice of the So- 
ciety, as originally held and maintained; and hope ever 
so to remain, being assured that they are those of Truth; 
and although your Yearly Meeting may not acknowledge 
us as Christian brethren (notwithstanding we have care- 
fully put in practice its advice), but has taken sides with 
those who have deprived us of the privileges of Society 



322 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

for obeying its injunction, yet we hope ever to remain 
fellow-laborers with you in the cause of Christ. 

" Signed on behalf of Indiana Yearly Meeting of A. S. 
Friends, held at Newport, Wayne county, Indiana; 
Ninth month, 1844. 



" Walter Edgerton, ) rl v 
Kebecca Edgerton." \ OCer/C6 - 



u P. S. — We have at this time received a copy of a 
Minute from the Yearly Meeting in Ireland, stating that 
that meeting can neither read nor accept any communica- 
tion from this Yearly Meeting or any of its subordinate 
branches. We find also in a document purporting to be 
an Epistle from the Standing Committee of the same 
Yearly Meeting, to the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana, 
now in circulation in this country, similar information. 
And as this is the only way we can come before the 
members of that body, we would offer to them a few re- 
marks thereon. 

"In that Epistle, they observe 4 no communication 
from that called Indiana Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, 
having been offered to our Yearly Meeting, it was spared 
the necessity of manifesting its disunity with a move- 
ment so inconsistent with the good order of our Society, 
by issuing a declaration of refusal to recognize or corre- 
spond with a body thus constituted. How constituted ? 
Self-organized, no doubt. This is evidently the reason 
intended to be given, for refusing to correspond. Now, 
it is a fact well known, that some years ago, a small 
body of Friends in Baltimore seceded from the body, and 
organized a Yearly Meeting of their own. Their case 
and ours are exactly parallel as regards the manner in 
which their meeting was constituted, except that they se- 
parated by Minute of adjournment, but this could not 
possibly make any difference in the principle. Did the 
Yearly Meeting of Ireland or London on that occasion, 
declare that movement to be inconsistent with the good 
order of our society ? Nay, did they not sympathize 
with and commend them for the act I And if there were 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 323 

such an occurrence to take place among Friends in 
America now, as did then, would they make such a de- 
claration in relation to it ? We believe those who 
seceded in that instance, proceeded to issue a declaration 
disowning the body en masse, as we have done in the 
present instance, and that for thus seceding, the body 
disowned them individually, as our opposers have us. 
But your Yearly Meeting holds correspondence with 
them (the seceders,) and refused us the right hand of fel- 
lowship for doing as these Friends did. 

" It must, we think, be obvious to all, that the reason 
assigned for their course is not the real one. As an ad- 
ditional evidence of this fact, we quote their own words 
as follows : 

" ' We rejoice in believing that the testimony of our 
Society against the complicated iniquities inseparable 
from the system of Slavery, continues to be FAITHFUL- 
LY upheld by our beloved brethren in various parts of 
America. 5 Now this, if it is not designedly ambiguous, 
all must see was intended to contradict the representa- 
tions of those publications (probably some of ours), which 
they say were in circulation among their members. The 
substance of these representations, if they were ours, were, 
that our opposers were not bearing a faithful testimony 
against Slavery. It is a matter of serious regret that a 
body of Friends should so obviously be led by such a 
temporizing spirit, for it is sufficiently plain, from what 
we have just quoted, that they did not believe our state- 
ments, and consequently that we had no just cause of 
separation, as Friends of Baltimore had. Why then did 
they not state that fact ? Why do they evade coming to 
the point, by giving that for the reason, which, by their 
own showing, as we have above exhibited, was not the 
reason ? 

" They make much profession of attachment to the 
cause of our Holy Redeemer, and strongly recommend to 
listen to the voice of the true Shepherd, and not follow 
the voice of the stranger. 

" Now let us say to the members of that Yearly Meet- 



324: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

ing, it is painful to find our confidence in the professions 
of such a body wrested from us by the above considera- 
tions. Would listening to the voice of the true Shepherd 
lead to such a policy ? Would it lead your Yearly Meet* 
ing to reject the evidences in our favor while receiving 
the bare assertions of our opposers, unattended by a par- 
ticle of evidence whatever ? Did not this true Shepherd 
command his followers, ' As ye would that men should 
do unto you do you even so unto them.' And were they 
doing as they would be done by in their proceedings 
against us ? We appeal to the witness for God in your 
consciences for an answer. 

" We KNOW, and the world knows, but more espe- 
cially the slaveholders know, that Friends in America do 
not bear a faithful testimony against Slavery. The evi- 
dences of this are to some extent before you in the docu- 
ments we have issued, which we would hope have been 
duly circulated among you. Those evidences our oppo- 
sers have never the first time attempted to controvert, 
but have contented themselves with denying the exist- 
ence of that which those evidences establish." 



CHAPTER XXYI. 

Committee appointed by London Yearly Meeting to endeavor to heal the 
Breach — The Address of that Meeting to those who had left Indiana 
Yearly Meeting. 

The Anti-Slavery party, among Friends, had, as al- 
ready shown, entertained a high estimation of the Anti- 
Slavery character of Friends in England, and although 
after the Separation they seemed to be held at a distance, 
they were unwilling to believe that the body of Friends 
there could be so warped aside as ultimately to reject 
those, though the smaller number, who claimed to follow 
their own example, without a thorough examination and 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 325 

investigation into the alleged causes of Separation. Un- 
der these views the information of the appointment of a 
committee, by London Yearly Meeting, to endeavor to 
heal the breach and produce reconciliation, was received 
with some cheering hope on the part of Anti-Slavery 
Friends, that justice, though delayed, would come at last. 

The committee was appointed in Fifth month, 1845, at 
which time the Yearly Meeting also adopted an Address 
and directed it, not to a Yearly Meeting of Friends, nor 
to Friends even, but to those who had withdrawn from 
Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends. 

Those who were deputed to bring it over, and labor to 
induce a compliance with its injunctions, were Wm.Fors- 
ter, George Stacey, Josiah Forster and John Allen. 
Here it is : 

xt From our Yearly Meeting, held in London, by adjournments 
from the 21st of the Fifth Month, to the 31st of the same, in- 
clusive, 1845. 

u To THOSE WHO HAVE RECENTLY WITHDRAWN FRO^I INDIANA YEARLY MEET- 
ING of Friends : 

" Dear Friends: — This meeting has from time to time 
been introduced into a feeling of much brotherly concern 
and interest on your behalf, in consequence of your hav- 
ing withdrawn from the body of Friends in Indiana 
Yearly Meeting ; and those feelings are attended with an 
earnest and affectionate solicitude for your re-union with 
them. 

u We have a strong sense of the preciousness and the 
safety of true gospel unity. We are enjoined to submit 
ourselves one to another in the fear of God ; to be subject 
one to another, and to be clothed with humility. This 
subjection one to another in love, greatly promotes that 
individual growth in grace which all the faithful follow- 
ers of Christ can not but desire may be their blessed ex- 
perience. 

" The considerations which have led us to address you 
are confirmed by reflecting on the comfort and strength 

15 



326 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 

which have arisen from that Christian fellowship and 
harmony which have prevailed in our religions society, to 
so large an extent, from its rise to the present period ; 
which we can only ascribe to the power of the Holy 
Spirit, so conspicuously manifested in its first gathering ; 
and every interruption to which blessings, must be re- 
garded as a very serious evil. 

u We cannot adequately set forth the sense we have of 
the extent to which, where the precious bond of religious 
fellowship is seen to be in danger, we are individually 
called upon to refrain from insisting on our own judg- 
ment, rather than do anything which could contribute to 
its dissolution. The living members of the body will 
watch carefully against such a tendency, seeking to be 
endued with all long-suffering, meekness and love, 

" Trusting that on the fundamental doctrines of the 
Gospel, and on the spirituality of divine worship, there 
exists no essential difference between you and the body 
from which you have withdrawn, we have felt much con- 
cern and sorrow on hearing that you have discontinued 
assembling with them to present yourselves before the 
Lord. Accept, we beseech you, our earnest and affec- 
tionate entreaty, that you will relinquish your separate 
meetings for this purpose — will wholly discontinue them, 
and again assemble for the public worship of Almighty 
God with those with whom you have been accustomed 
thus to meet. 

" In extending this invitation, we are not insensible to 
those humiliations by which the accepting it may be ac- 
companied. We feel tenderly for you in thinking of your 
present circumstances. But, whatever may be the sacri- 
fices which attend such a course of conduct as that which 
we thus venture to recommend, we believe that were it 
taken in the reverent fear and love of God, with a single 
eye to his honor, and to the service of our Lord and Re- 
deemer, it would bring that peace to the soul which pass- 
eth understanding ; that the blessing of the Most High 
would rest upon it, both as it affects you and your be- 
loved ofispring ; and that in your latter days, a retrospect 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OE ERlENDS. 327 

on this course would bring a comfort to the soul which 
would amply compensate for all that you may have to do 
or to endure in connection therewith* 

" With sincere desires that the wisdom which is from 
above, which is pure, peaceable, gentle and easy to be 
entreated, may be granted to every one of you on the pe- 
rusal and calm consideration of this our affectionate Ad* 
dress, we are your friends. 

" Signed in and on behalf of the meeting, by 
" George Stagey, 
" Clerk to the meeting this year^ 



CHAPTER XXVII. 

Epistle of Adrice and Statement of Facts, etc. 

The deputation arrived in this country in time to at- 
tend the Yearly Meeting, at White Water, in Tenth 
month. 

It would be difficult for the reader to form any just 
conception of the feelings of A. S. Friends, as every ves- 
tige of hope vanished, by the successive developments of 
the object and plans of the committee as set forth in the 
following Epistle of Advice and statement of facts, issued 
by the Meeting for Sufferings shortly after the committee 
commenced its business ; 

" EPISTLE OF ADVICE 



statement of facts, etc. 

" At a special meeting of the Meeting for Sufferings of 
Anti-Slavery Friends, held at Newport, Indiana, Tenth 
month 13th, 1845, 



828 HISTORY 0# TdE SEPARATION ifcf 

u The following document was produced by a commit- 
tee appointed for that purpose, and read ; and after due 
deliberation was united with and adopted, and directed 
to the particular attention of all Anti-Slavery Friends : 

" Dear Friends : — As a body set apart to represent 
the Yearly Meeting during its recess, we feel it to be a 
solemn duty, to address you at the present time, on a 
subject which we deem of vital importance to the pros- 
perity of our religious society, and to the general interest 
of humanity and the credit of the Christian religion* 
Our object is to exhort you to faithfulness and steadfast- 
ness in the maintenance of those principles, and religious, 
social relations whereunto we have been called, and in 
which we have so often experienced the solemnizing 
presence of the holy Head of the Church, covering our 
assemblies as with a mantle, filling our hearts with love 
to God and love to man, and confirming our souls, with- 
out doubt, in the belief that the Lord owned, and gra- 
ciously condescended to be with us in our religious 
meetings. 

u We are apprehensive that a time of trial awaits us ; 
and our earnest desire and prayer is, that all our mem- 
bers may dwell so deep in the fountain of Divine love, 
and live so near to the spring of life, keeping a single eye 
to the pointings of Truth, as to be preserved from being 
led away from the path of rectitude by the influence of 
man. 

" You are aware that the late Yearly Meeting in Lon- 
don appointed a committee to come to this country, in 
consequence of the division that had taken place in Indi- 
ana Yearly Meeting. And though we could not ascer- 
tain, previous to their arrival, the precise nature of their 
appointment, or the extent of their mission, yet we un- 
derstood they were to bring over an Address from their 
Yearly Meeting, to us, and from various sources of infor- 
mation, we were led to believe, at least to hope, that they 
would examine into the cause of difficulty among us, see 
which party, or whether both parties had erred, and offer 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 329 

their advice, as friendly mediators, to either or both par- 
ties, and thus endeavor to produce a reconciliation upon 
the ground of truth and justice. With this view of the 
subject, we rejoiced in the prospect of their visit, and 
looked forward with hope to the commencement and final 
result of their labors. 

" We well remember that London Yearly Meeting had 
repeatedly, in its Epistles, earnestly entreated Friends in 
this country to increased activity in behalf of the slave, 
and once, in its General Epistle (in 1830), advised 
Friends everywhere, to take part with their fellow coun- 
trymen, in this and other works of humanity. We knew 
that Friends in England were largely engaged in this 
cause, in the same manner with ourselves, and that at 
least two of the committee (Josiah Forster and George 
Stacey) were eminently conspicuous among the Aboli- 
tionists of Great Britain ; and we could not conceive that 
either the Yearly Meeting of London, or its committee, 
would, when they fully understood the matter (and we 
hoped the committee would take measures to get full in- 
formation on the subject), virtually uphold our opposers, 
in placing us out of the unity and harmony of religious 
Society, and effectually depriving us of its blessed privi- 
leges, or that they would unite in placing us under con- 
demnation, for following the Advice of that Yearly 
Meeting and imitating the practice of its most conspicu- 
ous members, and even of the committee now among us, 
when at home ; particularly without an impartial exami- 
nation of the merits of the case. The committee may 
say, as many of the members of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
have said, that they do not censure us for our Anti-Sla- 
very course, but for setting up separate meetings. But 
it is all sophistry ! The setting up of separate meetings 
was the natural and legitimate result of the proscriptive 
measures heaped upon us for our Anti-Slavery course ; 
as there was no other possible w T ay for us to enjoy the 
benefits of religious society ; and any censure placed upon 
us for setting up separate meetings, is censure for our la- 
bors in the cause of the slave. 



330 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

" But we must proceed to make some development of 
the present posture of affairs ; and, so far as they have 
come to our knowledge, the future prospects of the com- 
mittee. This we shall do in a hasty sketch of events 
which have transpired since their arrival at Richmond. 
The sources of information from which the following state- 
ment is compiled, we believe to be entirely reliable : 

" On the first day of the Yearly Meeting at Richmond, 
the Minute of the appointment of the committee was 
read, and one of their number made some remarks rela- 
tive to their mission. They also proposed the appoint- 
ment of a committee, by the meeting, to give them such 
information as they might wish for. The meeting com- 
plied with the request, taking the precaution to have 
every name approved before it was taken down by the 
Clerk. With this committee the London committee have 
had several interviews, of the nature of which we are 
not fully informed. 

u They attended the Yearly Meeting throughout, and 
we are informed, some of them expressed much satisfac- 
tion at finding Friends doing more for the colored people 
than they (the committee) anticipated. 

" They expressed no disapprobation of their course in 
regard to A. S. Friends, of their general bearing toward 
the Anti-Slavery cause, nor of their voting for slavehold- 
ers and Pro* Slavery men. 

" The information of what passed in the meeting was 
communicated by their own members. 

" The day after the meeting concluded, being the day 
on which the mid-week meeting of the ; body members' 
was held at Newport, the London committee attended it, 
went to the house of a ; body Friend' for dinner, and 
after dinner made a social visit to Charles Osborne, at 
Levi Coffin's, of perhaps half an hour. They returned 
to Richmond the same evening. This is all the instance, 
so far as we are informed, of their paying any attention 
to A. S. Friends since their arrival, except as a few have 
sought an interview with them since that time. Several 
other Friends were present during their visit to Charles 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 331 

Osborne, in the course of which some intimations of 
their intended course were given, and it was understood 
that they intended to set out for White Lick the next 
day. 

"After they left Newport, several Anti-Slavery Friends 
thought it necessary to confer a little on the circum- 
stances of the case, and the result of the conference was 
the following communication, which was delivered to 
them in Richmond, next day, by three of the Friends 
who had signed it : 

"'Newport, Tenth month 8th, 1845. 

" ' William Forster, Josiah Forster, George Stacey, and 
John Allen ; 

" c Esteemed Friends : — Being solemnly impressed with 
the importance of your mission to this country, and duly 
appreciating the arduous nature of the undertaking, we 
cannot but express our earnest desire and hope that your 
labors may be blessed to the promotion of the cause of 
truth and righteousness, and that when you return to your 
own land, you may bear with you the consoling reflection 
that, through the Divine aid, you have been instrumental 
in uniting Friends, in this country, in a hearty and effi- 
cient co-operation in their endeavors to undo the heavy 
burdens, and to let the oppressed millions in this land of 
boasted liberty go free. 

u c As you must be sensible that we, as Anti-Slavery 
Friends, feel a deep interest in the progress and final 
result of your labors, we hope you will duly appreciate 
our motives, and, at least, give us credit for candor in 
making to you the following suggestions : 

" ; We understand that your object is to endeavor to 
re-unite Friends of Indiana Yearly Meeting, who have 
been separated in consequence of different sentiments as 
to their proper course on the Anti-Slavery question, and of 
the measures which resulted from this difference of 
opinion. We are now two Yearly Meetings, and we 
have understood the object of your visit to be, to act as 
mediators between us, that we may become united again. 
Need we suggest to you the propriety of endeavoring to 



332 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

stand, as much as possible, uncommitted to either side, 
and so far as information may be wanted to endeavor to 
procure it in that way which shall be least likely to lead 
you to partial conclusions, or to give either party room 
to distrust your impartiality? 

"■'Now, so far as we have understood your course, 
since entering upon the object of your mission, and your 
plans for the future, we feel bound to say, we cannot view 
them in a light that is satisfactory. 

" ' You have thrown yourselves, as it were, into the 
bosom of one of the parties, to the neglect almost entirely 
of the other, the only exception, that we know of, being 
a visit of a few minutes to Charles Osborne. You 
attended their Yearly Meeting throughout, and requested 
the appointment of a committee of information ; with 
which committee, we understand, you have consulted as 
to your future operations, thus giving strength to the idea 
that you are altogether on their side. The result of your 
counsels, so far as we understand your plan of future 
operations, appears to us exceptionable in several parti- 
culars. We understand that you expect to call A. S. 
Friends together in their respective neighborhoods, be- 
ginning with some of the remote and small meetings, 
and to read to them the Address from the London Yearly 
Meeting. 

"'Our objection to this course will suggest itself to 
your minds without our naming it. It may be a master- 
stroke of policy to attack our outposts, for the purpose of 
weakening our forces, in an attempt to destroy our 
organization, if that is the object aimed at, but we very 
much doubt whether it is the course that can be recon- 
ciled with the object of your mission, as generally under- 
stood. Here, or at least in this vicinity, is the great 
body of A. S. Friends — here our Yearly Meeting is 
held — here, it was expected you w r ould meet us in coun- 
sel, and for this purpose our aged Friend, Charles 
Osborne, is here, not doubting that if you had anything 
for us, here would be the place to receive it. And here, 
still seems to us, is at least the place to begin. We do 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 333 

not presume to dictate, but we take the liberty to ask you 
to reconsider your proposed plan. Whatever course you 
may see proper to pursue toward A, S. Friends, or what- 
ever advice you may have to give them, or propositions 
to make to them, we think it reasonable that they should 
be commenced here instead of at our remote and small 
meetings. And especially if you intend to convene A. 
S. Friends to hear the Address, we would request you to 
commence here. In conclusion, dear Friends, we would 
suggest to you, that if you persist in that course which 
evidently implies a design to weaken us by operating 
upon our remote meetings or outposts, we shall feel our- 
selves justifiable in taking such measures as may appear 
to be advisable to guard our Friends against any impro- 
per influence. 

" 'Now we will just add, that if we are under wrong 
impressions, we hope to be set right; for it is painful to 
us to harbor an unfavorable thought respecting Friends 
for whom we have long entertained so high a regard as 
we have for those whom we are now addressing. 

" ' We expected you would take steps to inquire into 
the particulars of our difficulty, see where the wrong was, 
and endeavor to remove it. But if this is not your inten- 
tion, then we have been mistaken in the object of your 
visit. We have spoken plainly, but not in an unfriendly 
feeling, and hope you will attribute it to no other motive 
than a desire that the right may prosper. 

u ' With the salutation of our love, we remain your 
sincere Friends, 

u; Henry H. Way, Benjamin: Thomas, 

Egbert B. Bailey, Benjamin Stanton, 

Charles Osborne, Daniel Puckett, 

Catherine Coffin, Ruth Maulsby, 

Margaret Baldwin, Jonathan Hough, 

James Maulsby, George Shugart, jr. 

Levi Coffin, Samuel Charles.' 

"After they had read the communication, the three 
Friends who delivered it had an interview with them. 



334 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

They were informed by the committee, that from the lan- 
guage of the communication, they supposed there was a 
mistake in regard to the object of their mission. Stated, 
in substance, that they did not consider themselves as 
mediators, that the concern of London Yearly Meeting, 
the purport of the Address, and their object, were simply 
to endeavor to prevail upon us to discontinue our meet- 
ings for worship, and to attend the meetings for worship 
of the 'body. 5 

" When asked if they would not advise that our meet- 
ings for Discipline should be laid down, as well as meet- 
ings for worship? they said they had nothing to say 
about our meetings for Discipline. It was stated to them 
that A. S. Friends had understood their object to be, to 
promote a re-union, and they were asked, if they would 
advise us to condemn our conduct, or make acknowledg- 
ments to the Monthly meetings by which we were dis- 
owned. They replied, that they had nothing to say, or 
it was no part of their business to say anything about our 
making acknowledgments. So that the object of their 
mission — the great object in view, in crossing the wide 
Atlantic and traversing a large portion of this western 
country, appears to be, solely, to annihilate the religious 
Society of A. S. Friends, and to persuade its members to 
attend those of the * body.' A privilege not denied to 
any person. 

" They seemed to have no view of inquiring into the 
circumstances that caused the Separation, but George 
Stacey said, that he could conceive of no possible circum- 
stances in which he could be placed, that would justify 
him in suffering himself to be alienated from the body of 
Society. Thus fully indorsing the doctrine, either that 
the body of Friends is infallible, or that, let it become as 
corrupt as it may, its members are not justifiable in 
leaving it. 

"And Josiah Forster said, that dearly as he loved the 
Anti-Slavery cause, he could not, under any circum- 
stances, suffer it to be compared with the union of the 
Society of Friends. Our Friends, who had this interview 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 335 

with the committee, do not pretend to give their words 
verbatim, but the substance. 

"At parting, the editor of the Free Labor Advocate 
was advised to ' be quiet, 5 and a hope expressed, that if 
he would do so, their labors would be attended with 
success. 

u It may be proper to state in addition, that during the 
interview, they were informed that if they wished to see 
Anti-Slavery Friends together and to read to them the 
Address from London, they might have the opportunity 
at Newport, at the close of the anniversary of the State 
Anti-Slavery Society, of seeing more than they would be 
likely to see at any other time or place. They assented 
to the probability of that being the case, but expressed 
the opinion, and asked our A. S. Friends if they did not 
think it was correct, that they would have more influence 
with our members by convening them in their respective 
little neighborhoods, than by meeting a large body in 
Newport; though they had previously asserted that they 
had no view to ; outposts/ or motives of policy in their 

{>roposed plan of visiting the remote neighborhoods and 
eaving the principal body of A. S. Friends in this vici- 
nity till their return. 

"The following morning, the three A. S. Friends who 
had the interview with the committee, addressed to them 
the following note, which, we suppose, was delivered to 
them before they left Richmond for the West, intending, 
as we are informed, to go pretty directly to Iowa. 

" ' Newport, Ia., Tenth month 10th, 1845. 
"'William Forster, Josiah Forster, George Stacey, 
and John Allen : 

" ; Esteemed Friends : — Since our interview with you 
yesterday, we have, upon due reflection, concluded to 
address to you a brief note, just to inform you that we 
are no better satisfied with your proposed course than we 
were before, but on the contrary, our dissatisfaction has 
increased, in consequence of the discovery that your ob- 
ject is the annihilation of our religious society of A. S. 



336 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

Friends, without making any attempt to induce the old 
Yearly Meeting to do anything toward opening the way 
for our re-union, upon terms which we think we can con- 
sistently accept. Now, we wish you to know, that we, 
as well as you, highly value the unity and harmony of 
religious society, which we now enjoy in an eminent 
degree, and feel ourselves bound to endeavor to maintain 
our present position until there is a prospect of enjoying 
those privileges in some other way. We do not intend 
by this to ask you to alter your course, but to let you 
know that which A. S. Friends will take; that they are 
bound to take such measures as they deem best, to preserve 
our religious society in unity and harmony. And that 
neither the editor of the Advocate, nor any other A. S. 
Friend, will feel under any obligation to 4 be quiet, 5 in the 
sense in which we understood the advice to be given 
yesterday. " 'Benjamin Stanton, 

Levi Coffin, H. H. Way.' 

u Our object is to warn A. S. Friends that our reli- 
gious society is assailed, with a view to its prostration. 
Our measures are purely defensive, and in these endea- 
vors to preserve the unity, harmony, and integrity of our 
members, by warning them of the attack, we feel our- 
selves fully justifiable in setting forth the foregoing facts, 
remembering the Scripture declaration, that ' in vain is 
the snare laid in the sight of any bird.' We have 
thought it better to set forth the facts that have led us to 
the discovery of the objects which the committee aim at, 
rather than to state their objects, without confirming 
them by the facts. 

" And now, in conclusion, beloved Friends, we would 
again exhort you to trust in the Lord, remembering that 
in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength. Trust not 
in man, whose breath is in his nostrils. As we are thus 
concerned to dwell near the source of unfailing strength, 
the fear of man will be banished, and we shall be enabled 
to adopt the language c the Lord is my helper, I will not 
fear what man shall do unto me. 5 

" Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 



V 

INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 33? 

CHAPTER XXVIII. 

Account of the Proceedings of the English Committee in Iowa. 

The deputation, far from entertaining the least dispose 
tion to comply with the wishes of the body of Anti- Sla- 
very Friends, immediately proceeded to the consumma- 
tion of their plans in visiting the remote branches first. 

The following is a short account of their first labors, 
commencing in Iowa, and was furnished by a number of 
Anti-Slavery Friends of that place : 

" The committee having left Richmond pretty directly 
after the Yearly Meeting there, arrived at Salem on First- 
day evening, the 26th of Tenth month ; where they com*- 
menced their labors with A. S. Friends by calling all 
our members together, who met them in conference on 
Third-day the 28th inst., at 11 o'clock A. M. After 
the meeting had been gathered a few minutes, George 
Stacey arose to his feet, made a few remarks explanatory 
of their mission, read the Minute of their appointment, 
and then the Address from London Yearly Meeting to 
A. S. Friends, earnestly recommending the discontinuing 
of meetings for worship, and that we attend the meetings 
for worship of those with whom we Were formerly asso- 
ciated in religious fellowship. A serious and deliberate 
consideration of the contents of the Address was earn- 
estly recommended by the committee, each one of them 
briefly remarking on the great value of Christian fellow- 
ship and gospel unity, and of the exercise and travail of 
London Yearly Meeting on account of our secession. 

u William Forster expressed, in a feeling manner, his 
gratitude for the opportunity with us, and bore witness 
to the precious solemnity that covered the meeting. 

u The committee were informed that our English 
brethren did not know what they were asking of us, when 
they required our return to those from whom we have 
separated, without a removal of the causes of the sepa^- 
ration. 



338 msTORY OF THE SEFAttATIOH Xtf 

"And Friends were feelingly and earnestly recom- 
mended to look to Him who is abundantly able to direct 
and protect his dependent followers as man cannot do* 
Near the close of their interview with us, the committee 
informed the meeting, that they had a wish to visit us in 
our families, and a few Friends expressed a willingness 
for them to do so. 

"The committee then retired— A. S. Friends continu- 
ing in conference. After a pretty full and free expres- 
sion of sentiment on the advice contained in the Address, 
and the labors of the committee, the meeting nominated 
a few Friends to draw up and present to the committee 
our views briefly on the subject, and the reasons why we 
could not accede to the proposition, or comply with their 
advice. 

" The following is a copy of the address to the com- 
mittee, which was presented to them early the next morn- 
ing after the conference ; and they informed that they had 
privilege to visit us in our families. 

< •' Salem, Iowa, Tenth mo. %8th, 1845. 

" \ Esteemed Friends, William Forster, Josiah Forster, 
George Stacey, and John Allen. 

ut Upon duly considering the advice contained in the 
Address to us from London Yearly Meeting, to discon- 
tinue our meetings for worship, and attend the meetings 
for worship of those with whom we were formerly asso- 
ciated in religious fellowship, we believe it right to in- 
form you, through this medium, that we cannot accede 
to the proposition, for the following reasons: 

ut First, because we occupy our present position more 
from necessity than choice, having no alternative left us, if 
we would enjoy the benefit of religious society. Second, 
because we believe it would be a virtual surrender of our 
A. S. principles. Third, because by so doing we would 
not be securing to ourselves the benefits of religious soci- 
ety, nor the fellowship and unity so desirable, unless we 
are acknowledged by those you advise us to return to, as 
Friends in unity, with full privilege to continue our 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 339 

active exertions in the A. S. cause, as Truth may dictate, 
being accountable to the Society for violations of the dis- 
cipline only : but, on the other hand, we should lose the 
benefits of religious society, and the fellowship and unity 
which stand not in word only, but in the life and power 
of the Truth ; which fellowship we believe we have often 
been favored to feel since our separate organization. 
Fourth, because by so doing our influence in a society 
capacity will be lost, and thus, instead of advancing the 
cause of truth and righteousness on the earth, we would 
become a hinderance. And fifth, because we are in unity 
with Indiana Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, and be- 
lieve the Advice should claim the attention of our Meet- 
ing for Sufferings. 

" 'And, in conclusion, we would further state, that we 
can but view the course of London Yearly Meeting, and 
your course as a committee, as very extraordinary. That 
without ever entering into an impartial examination of 
the causes that led to the difficulty that exists between 
us, and those we were formerly associated with in reli- 
gious fellowship, you enter into judgment, and require 
us to return, without an effort to remove the causes of 
the difficulty that separates us ; which removal would 
open the way for us to return on principles that would 
have a tendency to restore the unity that is so desirable, 
but which cannot be restored without the removal of those 
causes. 

" f In love we remain your friends. ~ 

" ■ Signed on behalf of the members of Salem Monthly 
meeting of A. S. Friends. 

U4 Aaron Street, Jr., Thomas Frazier, Henderson Lew- 
elling, Marmaduke Jay, Wm. Lewelling, Gideon Frazier, 
Elizabeth Lewelling, Anna Johnson, Hannah Blackledge, 
Cyrena Lewelling.' 

" On Sixth day, the 31st of Tenth month, the Monthly 
meeting of the 'body 'was held at Salem, which the 
committee attended, and we understand by some who 
attended, that one of the committee alluded to the sub- 
ject of the Separation, and advised Friends, if any of the 



340 liisfoRir of the separation is 

seceders from them should return, to receive them again 
into fellowship; but said nothing about preparing the 
way for our return, by removing the causes of the sepa- 
ration. 

u Some of our members felt that they could not be 
well satisfied to let the committee pass away from us, 
without soliciting another conference between them and 
A. S. Friends collectively ; to which proposition they 
assented, remarking, at the same time, to those who 
made the request, that they had no liberty to enter into 
an examination or discussion of the causes of difference 
between us and those from whom we have separated, and 
should not feel bound to answer questions that would 
commit them. 

" Another conference was accordingly held on the 
seventh day of Eleventh month, at 10 o'clock A. M., 
through the course of which a full and free expression 
w r as given by A. S. Friends, on the course pursued by our 
English brethren ; and the committee was faithfully 
warned of the tendency of their labors among us, and that 
we were fully of the opinion that they would inevitably 
tend to widen the breach between us and those from whom 
w r e separated, instead of healing it, by placing censure 
on us for our course, and strengthening and establishing 
our opposers in their arbitrary, proscriptive, and unchris- 
tian measures toward us ; and that it would have a ten- 
dency to retard the work of emancipation in the United 
States, by throwing the weight of the influence of the 
Society* of Friends in England and America, against the 
honest laborers in the cause. That the most violent op- 
posers to the righteous cause, and bitter haters of the 
colored man, and of his rights, that we have to contend 
with, feel it to be one of their strongholds ; as they fre- 
quently throw up to us the position of the Society of 
Friends on this subject ; and have already referred exult- 
ingly to the course of the committee, as an evidence 
that we are wrong. 

" The committee remarked, that they supposed we 
would give them credit for their Anti-Slavery labors* 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 341 

They were informed that we could not give them credit for 
any A. S. labors since they arrived in the United States ; 
inasmuch as they had carefully avoided attending the Anni- 
versary of the Indiana State Anti-Slavery Society, and had 
not attended any other A. S. meetings ; and that it was 
our belief, if they had maintained their A. S. principles 
boldly and faithfully since coming to this country, and 
opposed the time-serving spirit of Friends in this country, 
they might have been instrumental in removing the diffi- 
culty existing between us and Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
and thereby have given strength to that righteous cause 
which they profess to love so dearly at home. The com- 
mittee took the position that London Yearly Meeting had 
not the authority to act as a mediator between the con- 
tending parties here, as that meeting did not stand in the 
relation to Indiana Yearly Meeting, of a Yearly Meeting 
to a Quarterly meeting, and had no right to call it to an 
account for its acts ; and, therefore, they could not enter 
into an investigation of the circumstances of the difficulty. 
" They were informed that we were sensible of that 
fact, but that London or any other Yearly Meeting has 
the right, in brotherly love, to offer its services as medi- 
ator between contending parties in our religious society; 
and that the same concern by which they profess to have 
been actuated in their course, would have justified them 
in offering their services in this case as mediators, and 
of entering into an impartial examination of the causes 
of the difficulty, and to have given such counsel and ad 
vice to either or both parties, as might have been appro- 
priate, and calculated to remove the difficulty between 
us. And that they had just the same right to act in 
that way, as they have in the way they are acting. The 
committee at different times alluded to the circumstance 
of our agreement on the fundamental doctrines and prin- 
ciples of Friends ; and that the only difference between 
us and Indiana Yearly Meeting, was in the manner of 
carrying out our Anti-Slavery principles. They were 
informed that we believed the difference between us and 
members of the Indiana Yearly Meeting amounted to a 

15* 



342 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

total lack on their part, of acting efficiently in the cause; 
which continues to be manifested by their refusing to 
identify themselves with the Abolitionists of the United 
States — by voting for slaveholders and Pro-Slavery 
men — by the indiscriminate use of the productions of 
slavery ; and by refusing to open their meeting-house 
doors to A. S. lecturers, thus discountenancing the de- 
voted laborers in the good cause, whatever may be their 
moral worth. 

u These are some of the obstacles that stand in the 
way of a reunion; and our English brethren, in their 
efforts to effect a re-union, have entirely declined to ex- 
amine into, and endeavor to remove those with other 
causes of difference. 

" On one of the committee (Josiah Forster) express- 
ing, as they had severally done in their family labors, an 
opinion that the circumstances in America are so differ- 
ent from what they are in England, that it is not best for 
Friends to unite with others in the A. S. cause as they 
do in England ; he was asked for his reason for such a 
conclusion, and to explain the circumstances of differ- 
ence ; and he acknowledged he had no reason matured 
for it. They were then told that the objection had often 
been made to us, and the objectors had as often failed 
to give a reason for if; and that we believed the differ- 
ence between the two countries, in relation to the Anti- 
Slavery cause, is, that in England it is popular, and in 
America it is unpopular ; and that we should have to 
conclude that this is the only reason that can be rendered 
for the opinion that Friends here should not act in the 
A. S. cause as they do there. At which they were silent. 

" One of the committee expressed that he thought the 
term 'Anti-Slavery, 5 attached to our name, very objection- 
able ; for, he said, the principles of the Society of Friends 
are, and have been Anti-Slavery, for the last century. 
And they advanced the sentiment, that an investigation 
of the causes of the difficulty would be attended with 
deleterious effects, and would result in widening the 
breach. And they severallv insisted that thev had no 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 343 

intention of placing any degree of censure on us for our 
course, or of justifying our opposers in theirs, and that 
their Yearly Meeting has always avoided doing so; and 
they again earnestly urged the consideration and adop- 
tion of the Advice from their Yearly Meeting. But they 
were again told that their course inevitably had that ten- 
dency, and they could not prevent that consequence 
while they continued therein. 

" The committee, when questioned at different times, 
with regard to the course it would be necessary for us to 
pursue, to obtain the privilege of religious fellowship and 
unity with those they require us to return to, have never 
proposed any other plan than merely our attending their 
meetings for worship, without any privileges more than 
those have, who never possessed a right of membership 
in the Society. 

" In conclusion, we would here state, that we have not 
undertaken to give the precise language that was used 
in the different interviews here narrated ; but we have 
endeavored to give the sense and purport of what was said. 

" Signed by direction of a meeting, and on behalf of the 
members of Salem Monthly meeting of A. S. Friends, Iowa. 

u Anna Johnson, William Lewelling, Elvy Lewelling, 
Cyrena Lewelling, Aaron Street, Jr.. Rachel Joy, Shan- 
nah Hiatt, Marmaduke Jay, James Comer, Jane Lewel- 
ling, Eli Jessop, Nathan Hammer, John Lewelling, Hen- 
derson Lewelling, Sarah Marine, Elizabeth Lewelling. 



CHAPTER XXIX. 

Proceedings of the English Committee at ISTettle Creek. 

As the committee passed along from place to place, 
they were very careful not to eat or lodge with the ob- 
jects of their solicitude, when it could be avoided. And 
in calling Friends together, they studiously avoided using 
the term Anti-Slavery Friends, professing to be restricted 
by conscience from so doing. 



844 HISTORY OP THE SEPARATION IK 

Neither would they in their language, acknowledge we 
had any meetings, but would speak of the " little com- 
pany," in this, that, or the other place. Every move- 
ment on their part, showed that their ardent desire was 
to break up the organization of A. S. Friends. 

When they chanced to come across one that could be 
diverted with the relation of some incident foreign to the 
object of their mission, or pleased with soft and oily 
words, they had sagacity enough soon to discover it ; and 
then it was they were indeed communicative and soci- 
able ; but let any one put a few questions, as was fre- 
quently done, respecting the manner in which Friends in 
England acted touching the Anti-Slavery cause; or how 
they could persuade Anti-Slavery Friends to submit to 
a body which prohibited its members from doing as their 
own Yearly Meeting recommended to do, etc., etc., and 
they were at once dumb. Sometimes, however, they 
would converse a little together in a low tone, or whisper, 
and then inform the "little company;" they did not 
think proper to answer such questions. 

It will not be necessary to narrate the proceedings 
with all the " little companies ;" an account of one or 
two other of their conferences may suffice. 

" At Nettle Creek, after they had taken their seats a few 
minutes, George Stacey stated that the object in calling them 
together, was to read an expostulatory Address from London 
Yearly Meeting, to those who had believed it right to with- 
draw from Indiana Yearly Meeting, and set up separate 
meetings to themselves. It was then stated, on the part of 
A. S. Friends, that from the course they, the committee, 
had pursued hitherto, it was understood that their sole 
object was, to lay waste the religious Society of A. S. 
Friends. To this they made no reply. They were 
plainly told that A. S. Friends felt called upon to watch 
upon the walls of their Zion, and to guard against the 
encroachments of the enemy ; and they were requested to 
allow them the same privilege that Paul had, that is, to 
answer for themselves, 

"To this the committee partially consented. 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 345 

"The Address was then read. After which the com- 
mittee made some remarks, censuring A. S. Friends, and 
justifying their opposers. 

"They were repeatedly asked, if they had investigated 
the difficulty between us and those we had left. To 
which they gave no answer. But when they w T ere told 
how one-sided they were in giving judgment before 
hearing both parties ; they said they knew nothing of the 
cause of separation, and they had no privilege from their 
Yearly Meeting to investigate the difference between us ; 
and they did not come here to discuss the matter, but 
were messengers to expostulate with us. 

"They were then replied to in regard to their great 
mission, as being messengers of the Lord ; and told of 
their inconsistency, by alluding to their standing in re- 
gard to the Anti-Slavery cause in England, and the 
different course they took in America ; how they had 
advised us, heretofore, to join with our fellow-countrymen 
in this great work, and how they now advised us to 
return to that body which had rejected that advice and 
proscribed us for following it. One of the committee 
then said he wished to give some explanation in regard 
to the allusion that had been made to their being messen- 
gers of the Lord. He said they did not say, nor had they 
said, they were messengers of the Lord ; they w T ere only 
messengers qf London Yearly Meeting (in this he said 
truly), and came here to carry the message from that 
meeting. 

"They contended that the different Yearly Meetings in 
America bore a faithful and consistent testimony against 
Slavery. They were then asked, if they believed the 
Society of Friends in America, faithfully and consistently 
bore a testimony in favor of the Anti-Slavery cause in this 
country. To which George Stacey replied, that he was 
not fully acquainted with the character of the Anti-Slavery 
enterprise in this country ; it might be possible that it 
consisted of those icho were infidels ; and if so, they in 
England w r ould advise against joining with such associa- 
tions. He was then asked, if he knew whether the Anti- 



346 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION Itf 

• Slavery associations in England, were clear of all those 
who hold unsound principles ? To which he made no 
reply. They were then told, that Hi might be possible* 
there were some, both in Europe and America, engaged 
in the Anti-Slavery cause, who were not sound in prin- 
ciple ; and that it was quite as possible, there were some 
in the Society of Friends, who were not sound in principle. 
To all of which they made no reply. 

"Various questions were put to them, and among others, 
whether it was consistent with our testimony against Sla- 
very, for Friends to vote for slaveholders ? Which they 
refused to answer, though they were solicited to do so. 
They were then referred to the example of George Fox ; 
how he answered all civil questions, investigated things, 
and never gave judgment without hearing both sides, etc. 

" Toward the conclusion, a friend proposed asking 
them a few more questions. One of them rose and said, 
they should decline answering them. The questions, 
however, were put as follows : 

"1st. Do you know whether there is any difference 
between the Body Friends, and Anti-Slavery Friends ? 

"2d. Do you know whether the charges made by the 
old Yearly Meeting against A. S. Friends, are true or not? 

"3d. Do you know whether the charges made by A. S. 
Friends against the old Yearly Meeting, are true or not ? 

"4th. Is it the duty of a Christian, when there are two 
parties, to ask one of them to submit to the other, without 
an investigation, to see which is in the wrong ? 

"5th. Would it be right to ask others to do anything, 
without giving all explanations, and answering all ques- 
tions, so far as is in their power to give or answer, 
relating thereto %V- 

But they were as good as their word, they made no 
reply to the questions. 



INDIANA YEAELY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 347 



CHAPTER XXX. 

English Committee at Newport — A Response to the Address carried 
round by that Committee. 

To read the Address and urge submission to its advice, 
seemed to be the sole business of the committee, and it 
was hard work to divert them in the least from it. 

At Newport, however, they were induced to enter into 
some little discussion, and make some admissions relative 
to their connection with the British and Foreign Anti- 
Slavery Society, and Anti- Slavery Friends pretty fully 
exposed their position and their course. 

At the conclusion of the conference, the committee 
were asked, if they would carry back to their Yearly 
Meeting a response to the Address they had been carry- 
ing round to Anti-Slavery Friends ? to which, they 
replied, they could see no propriety in sending such a 
communication, and refused to take one. 

The following, however, was issued by the Meeting 
for Sufferings, and sent in another way : 

" To the Yearly Meeting of London; to the Quarterly 
and Monthly Meetings constituting the same, and to 
the members thereof individually. 

" Dear Friends: — 

" In the fear of the Lord, and under a solemn sense 
of the obligation resting upon us, to stand for the defense 
of the Truth, at the same time being sensible of our own 
weakness and insufficiency as men and creatures, but in 
humble reliance on the unfailing arm of the Shepherd of 
Israel, we believe it right at this time to address you, 
although you have heretofore refused to give our com- 
munications a hearing in your Yearly Meeting. Our ob- 
ject is not now to solicit the customary correspondence 
between Yearly Meetings, for this your previous course, 
both in the capacity of a Yearly Meeting and Meeting 
for Sufferings forbids us to expect ; and indeed, unless 



348 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

we could see in the action of those meetings, relative to 
the unhappy difficulty among Friends in this country, 
arising from the opposition of the ? body,' to the A. S. 
action of some of its members, more regard for consist- 
ency and truth, than for the forms of order — more con- 
cern for the promotion of the great cause of justice and 
mercy, than for the preservation of the external bonds of 
union, such a correspondence is, perhaps, as undesirable 
to us as it is to you. Still, as your Yearly Meeting has 
thought fit to issue an Address to us — though still refus- 
ing to recognize us as brethren — advising us to discon- 
tinue our meetings for worship, and to attend those of 
the ' body,' and has sent over a deputation to present the 
Address, and to urge a compliance with the advice ; we 
believe ourselves called upon, even by a regard for com- 
mon courtesy, and a decent respect for civility, as well 
as justice to ourselves, to the Truth which we advocate, 
and for the information of all concerned, to make a brief 
reply to the Address, in a respectful manner, and with 
feelings of due regard, declining to comply with the Ad- 
vice. And while we believe ourselves thus bound to 
submit to your consideration some of the reasons which 
impel us to this course, we think we have a just claim to 
a patient and impartial hearing before that body from 
which the Advice issued. 

" We do not desire now to rehearse the particulars of 
the difficulty which resulted in the establishment of our 
Yearly Meeting. The most important facts have been 
presented to your Yearly Meeting, which it has refused 
to hear, choosing to make up a judgment in our case 
merely from the statements of our opposers, and from the 
simple fact, that we had set up separate and independent 
meetings. Thus, by refusing to inquire into, or even 
hear our reasons for the measure, and at the same time 
virtually passing sentence of condemnation upon us, by 
refusing to correspond with us, and advising us to dis- 
continue our meetings ; your Yearly Meeting has practi- 
cally recognized (however you may discard it in theory), 
the doctrine of the infallibility of the Church, or else 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 349 

that equally absurd and dangerous position, that, no 
matter how corrupt and oppressive the Church may be- 
come, those members who desire to have it otherwise, 
are bound to submit to the corrupt and anti-christian 
measures of the dominant party, to preserve the external 
forms of order and the appearance of harmony, We 
believe there is no possibility of escape from this dilem- 
ma, for a departure from the usual order in the establish- 
ment of meetings, instead of the merits of the contro- 
versy, is made the grounds of the judgment of your 
Yearly Meeting. 

" This doctrine of implicit, unconditional, and unqua- 
lified submission to the powers that be, in religious So- 
ciety, which is so prevalent among Friends, both in this 
country and in England, is a most conclusive evidence 
of a lamentable defection from first principles. All ec- 
clesiastical history testifies to the fact, that in proportion 
to the corruptions of the Church, have been its claims to 
infallibility, and to a blind submission to the decrees of 
its dignitaries. 

" To assume that the references which your Yearly 
Meeting have made to passages of Scripture, to enforce 
the duty of submission to one another, are applicable in 
the present case, is to take for granted the very thing in 
controversy, that is, that the requirements of Indiana 
Yearly Meeting were in accordance with truth, and 
which London Yearly Meeting has refused to investigate. 
That it is our duty to submit ourselves one to another in 
love, in the truth, and in the fear of God, we freely ad- 
mit; but not in error and in the fear of man; for the 
fear of man bringeth a snare. 

" The exhortation, to submit ourselves one to another 
in love, no more requires a surrender of our own con- 
sciences into the keeping of the rulers of the church, 
than the requirement to be subject to the powers that be, 
puts us under an obligation to surrender them to the 
wicked rulers of the State. It is all a perversion, and so 
far as the doctrine in question has obtained a hold among 
those with whom we were formerly associated, we feel 

16 



3S0 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 

bound to say to our London Friends, that they are mis- 
taken in supposing, that on fundamental doctrine there 
is no essential difference between us. We regard the 
doctrine of individual responsibility and accountability 
to be one of vital importance, and that the difference be- 
tween us and those who contend for implicit obedience 
to the mandates of the Church, however contrary they 
may be to our conscientious convictions of duty, is essen- 
tial ; and we can have no fellowship with the sentiment 
repeatedly put forth by members of the London deputa- 
tion, that no conceivable circumstances can justify a 
separation from the £ body.' 

" But independently of the foregoing considerations, 
there are other circumstances which dictate to us the pro- 
priety of declining a compliance with the advice. We 
would briefly state that in pursuing the course which 
brought upon us the displeasure of our fellow-members, 
and placed us under the necessity of occupying our pres- 
ent position, we were greatly encouraged by the example 
of our English brethren, and by the advice of your 
Yearly Meeting, in 1830, to unite with our fellow-coun- 
trymen in the promotion of this and other benevolent en- 
terprises. This advice we were very ready to comply 
with, not because of your word, but because we heard and 
felt for ourselves that it was in accordance with the dic- 
tates of Truth. And now, we can not see the propriety 
of giving up our own views of required duty, in conse- 
quence of your recent advice ; neither can we see the 
justice of your course in virtually censuring us for imita- 
ting your example, and following your advice, while you 
cling to and effectually justify those who have rejected 
that advice, and presented a most formidable opposition 
to the advancement of the Anti-Slavery enterprise, No 
religious society, in this country, we confidently believe, 
has exerted a greater influence adverse to its advance- 
ment than the Society of Friends. Its former Anti-Sla- 
very character, and the fact of its being clear of slave- 
holding, gave it the power of exerting a greater influence 
for or against the cause, than any other society of equal 



INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 351 

numbers; and that influence, as is well known, Las been 
exerted, either by manifesting an apathy of feeling toward 
it, or by active opposition to it and to those who are la- 
boring therein. But we forbear to enlarge upon this 
topic ; and dismiss it with the observation, that the con- 
duct of London Yearly Meeting and of its deputation is 
calculated to uphold the Friends in this country in their 
opposition to the labors of the Abolitionists, in adhering 
to a Pro-Slavery political party, and in voting for slave- 
holders. We cannot consent to act in accordance with 
the advice contained in the Address and urged by the 
committee, because it would be a surrender of our just 
rights ; and it would be to deprive ourselves of the ines- 
timable privileges which we now enjoy of religious fel- 
lowship with one another in the bonds of gospel unity. 

" We cannot comply with the advice, because it would 
be a virtual acknowledgment that our Anti-Slavery prin- 
ciples and views were all wrong, and must lead to an 
abandonment of them ; which would, as we conceive, 
work infinite damage to the blessed cause, by operating 
as a discouragement to our fellow-laborers. 

u And, finally, we cannot comply with the advice, be- 
cause we believe it would bring disgrace upon the Chris- 
tian name, by giving an additional evidence that the 
4 American Churches are the bulwarks of American 
Slavery. 5 

" We wish to say, before we conclude, that we fully 
believe there are many members of London Yearly Meet- 
ing, who deeply sympathize with us, who have no unity 
with the attempt to destroy our religious society, and who 
did not fully understand the course of labor prescribed for 
the committee by the Yearly Meeting, as they themselves 
explain it. This opinion is confirmed by the frequent ex- 
pression by some of our truly sympathizing Friends of a 
hope that a proper reconciliation would be effected by the 
labors of the deputation. This hope they could not have 
entertained had they understood that no other attempt 
was to be made than to annihilate our religious society, 
and to justify the proceedings of our opposers. 



352 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN INDIANA. 

" To those of your Friends, who have some just con- 
ceptions of the true state of the case, we beg leave to say, 
the responsibility that rests upon you is great, and we j 
pray that you may be enabled faithfully to discharge 
your duty in the sight of God. 

" Unless we shall become convinced that Slavery is not ] 
that great evil which we have long believed it to be, we 
should consider ourselves traitors to the cause of Truth, 
which we believe ourselves called to advocate, were we 
to accede to the advice of your Yearly Meeting and its 
committee. And should the labors of that committee 
prove effectual in the accomplishment of their designs, 
we have no doubt but the damage done to the Anti-Sla- 
very cause would be incalculable. But, thanks be to 
Him, who controls the elements, we believe their course 
has had a powerful tendency to strengthen the minds of 
Anti-Slavery Friends generally, in the confidence of the 
rectitude of our position. 

"And now, in coming to a conclusion, permit us to 
state, that with our present convictions of duty, we can 
not look towards a re-union with those whom we have 
left, upon any other terms than a total recantation of all 
their proscriptive measures, and an unconditional restora- 
tion to all the rights and privileges which we formerly 
enjoyed in the Society, with unrestrained liberty to pur- 
sue our Anti-Slavery labors according to the dictates of 
our own consciences ; being responsible to the Church 
only for violations of the Discipline. We shall rejoice 
to hail such a proposition, made in good faith, and upon 
a thorough conviction of its propriety, by our Friends of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting. 

" Signed by direction and on behalf of the Meeting for 
Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery 
Friends, held Second month 28th, 1846. 

"Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 



the end, 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: April 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVA1 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



